AFRICOM: The Pentagon’s First Direct Military Intervention In Africa

30. August 2009 by Assimba.

by Rick Rozoff

.
Global Research, August 25, 2009
Stop NATO - 2009-08-24

Email this article to a friend
Print this article

The 2009 World Population Data Sheet published by the Washington, DC-based Population Reference Bureau states that the population of the African continent has surpassed one billion. Africans now account for over a seventh of the human race.

Africa’s 53 nations are 28% of the 192 countries in the world.

The size and location of the continent along with its human and natural resources - oil, natural gas, gold, diamonds, uranium, cobalt,
chromium, platinum, timber, cotton, food products - make it an
increasingly important part of a world that is daily becoming more
integrated and interdependent.

Africa is also the last continent to free itself from colonial domination. South America broke free of Spanish and Portuguese control in the beginning of the 1800s (leaving only the three Guianas - British, Dutch and French - still colonized) and the post-World War II decolonization of Asia that started with former British East India in 1947 was almost complete by the late 1950s.

Sub-Saharan Africa was not to liberate most of its territory from
Belgian, British, French, Spanish and Portuguese colonial masters until the 1960s and 1970s. And the former owners were reluctant to cede newly

created African nations any more than nominal independence and the ability to choose their own internal socio-economic orientation and foreign policy alignment.

In the two decades of the African independence struggle the continent
was marred by Western-backed coups d’etat and assassinations of
liberation leaders which included those against Patrice Lumumba in the former Belgian Congo in 1961, Ben Barka in Morocco in 1965, Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana in 1966, Eduardo Mondlane in Mozambique in 1969, Amilcar Cabral in Guinea-Bissau in 1973 and Marien Ngouabi in the Republic of the Congo (Brazzaville) in 1977.

In his latest Anti-Empire Report veteran political analyst William Blum wrote, “the next time you hear that Africa can’t produce good leaders, people who are committed to the welfare of the masses of their people,
think of Nkrumah and his fate. And think of Patrice Lumumba, overthrown in the Congo 1960-61 with the help of the United States; Agostinho Neto of Angola, against whom Washington waged war in the 1970s, making it impossible for him to institute progressive changes; Samora Machel of Mozambique against whom the CIA supported a counter-revolution in the 1970s-80s period; and Nelson Mandela of South Africa (now married to Machel’s widow), who spent 28 years in prison thanks to the CIA.” [1]

Some of Blum’s references are to a series of proxy wars supported by
the United States and its NATO allies and in some instances=2
0apartheid South Africa and the Mobutu Sese Seko regime in Zaire in the mid-1970s and the 1980s, such as arming and training the National Front for the Liberation of Angola (FNLA) and the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA), the unspeakably brutal Mozambican National Resistance (RENAMO), and Eritrean and Tigrayan armed separatists in Ethiopia as well as backing the Somali invasion of the Ogaden Desert in that country in 1977.

Over the past five years French troops and bombers have waged deadly attacks inside Cote d’Ivoire, Chad and the Central African Republic either in support of or against rebels, always in furtherance of France’s own geopolitical objectives. In the second application of the so-called Blair Doctrine, in 2000 Britain sent troops to its former
colony of Sierra Leone and has de facto recolonized the nation, taking control of its military and internal security forces.

But in the post-World War II period there has only been one direct
American military action in Africa, the deadly 1986 air strikes against Libya in April of 1986, Operation El Dorado Canyon.

While conducting wars, bombings, military interventions and invasions in Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia, the Middle East and recently Southeastern Europe over the past half century, the Pentagon has left
the African continent comparatively unscathed. That is going to change after the establishment of the United States Africa Com
mand on October 1 of 2007 and its activation a year later.

The U.S. has intensified military involvement in Africa over the past
seven years with such projects as the Pan Sahel Initiative (PSI),
launched by the State Department but which deployed US Army Special Forces with the Special Operations Command Europe to Mali and Mauritania among other locations. U.S. military personnel are still engaged in the counterinsurgency wars in Mali and Niger against Tuareg rebels.

The Pan Sahel Initiative was succeeded by the Trans-Saharan
Counterterrorism Initiative (TSCTI) in late 2004 which hasAmerican
military personnel assigned to eleven African nations: Algeria, Burkina Faso, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria and Senegal.

The Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative was formally launched in
June of 2005 with the deployment of 1,000 American troops, among them Green Berets, in Operation Flintlock 05 in North and West Africa to engage with counterparts from seven nations: Algeria,Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal and Tunisia.

Until their transfer to the Africa Command (AFRICOM) all 53 nations on the continent except for those in the Horn of Africa (assigned to Central Command) and the island nations of Madagascar and the Seychelles in the Indian Ocean (handled by Pacific Command) were within the area of responsibilty of the European Command (EUCOM), whose top commander is simultaneously the Supreme Allied Commander of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

As such the past two EUCOM and NATO commanders, Marine General James Jones (2003-2006) and Army General Bantz John Craddock (2006-June, 2009), were the most instrumental in setting up AFRICOM.

Jones is now U.S. National Security Adviser and at this February’s
Munich Security Conference opened his speech with “As the most recent
National Security Advisor of the United States, I take my daily orders
from Dr. [Henry]Kissinger.” [2]

In 2008, while serving as State Department special envoy for Middle
East security and chairman of the Atlantic Council of the United
States, Jones said, “[A]s commander of NATO, I worried early in the
mornings about how to protect energy facilities and supply chain routes as far away as Africa, the Persian Gulf and Caspian Sea.” [3]

Shortly before stepping down from his military posts with NATO and the Pentagon “NATO’s top commander of operations, U.S. General James Jones, has said he sees a potential role for the alliance in protecting key shipping lanes such as those around the Black Sea and oil supply routes from Africa to Europe.” [4]

Three years ago a Pentagon web site documented that “Officials at U.S. European Command spend between 65 to 70 percent of their time on African issues, [James] Jones said….Establishing such a group [military task force in West Africa] could also send a message to U.S. companies ‘that investing in many parts of Africa is a good idea,’ the general said.” [5)

During the final months of his dual tenure as NATO’s and EUCOM’s top military commander, Jones transitioned Africa from EUCOM’s to AFRICOM’s control while also expanding the role of NATO on the continent.

In June of 2006 the Alliance launched its global Rapid Response Force with its first large-scale military exercises off the coast of the
former Portuguese possession of Cape Verde, in the Atlantic Ocean west of Senegal.

U.S press reports of the time offered these details:

“Hundreds of elite North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) troops
backed by fighter planes and warships will storm a tiny volcanic island off Africa’s Atlantic coast this week in what the Western alliance hopes will prove a potent demonstration of its ability to project power around the world.” [6]

“Seven thousand NATO troops conducted war games on the Atlantic Ocean
island of Cape Verde on Thursday in the latest sign of the alliance’s
growing interest in playing a role in Africa.

“The land, air and sea exercises were NATO’s first major deployment in Africa and designed to show the former Cold War giant can launch
far-flung military operations at short notice.

“‘You are seeing the new NATO, the one that has the ability to project stability,’ said NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told a news conference after NATO troops stormed a beach on one of the islands on the archipelago in a mock assault on a fictitious terrorist camp. “NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe James Jones, the alliance soldier in charge of NATO operations, said he hoped the two-week Cape Verde
exercises would help break down negative images about NATO in Africa and elsewhere.” [7]

Rwandan troops heading to Sudan in 2005

NATO’s first operation in Africa had occurred a year earlier in May of 2005 when the bloc transported African Union troops to the Darfur region of Sudan, at the crossroads of a war-riven region comprised of the Central African Republic, Chad and Sudan.

The Alliance has since deployed warships to the Horn of Africa and the Gulf of Aden, last year with Operation Allied Protector, and this
August 17 NATO announced that it was dispatching British, Greek,
Italian, Turkish and U.S. warships to the area for a new mission,
Operation Ocean Shield. These operations don’t consist of mere
surveillance and escort roles but include regular forced boardings,
sniper attacks and other uses of armed and often lethal force.

On August 22 a Netherlands contingent of the complementary European Union naval force off Somalia used an attack helicopter against a vessel in the area which subsequently was taken over by troops from a Norwegian warship.

Over three years before, now U.S. National Security Adviser and then
NATO chief military commander James Jones addressin
g what was his major “national security” concern at the time, “raised the prospect of NATO taking a role to counter piracy off the coast of the Horn of Africa and the Gulf of Guinea, especially when it threatens energy supply routes to Western nations.” [8]

A month later both he and NATO’s then top civilian leader, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, reiterated the above commitment.

“NATOs’ [commanders] are ready to use warships to ensure the security
of offshore oil and gas transportation routes from Western Africa, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, NATO’s Secretary General, reportedly said speaking at a session of the foreign committee of PACE [Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe].

“On April 30 General James Jones, commander-in-chief of NATO in Europe,
reportedly said NATO was going to draw up a plan for ensuring the
security of oil and gas industry facilities.

“In this respect the bloc is willing to ensure security in unstable
regions where oil and gas are produced and transported.” [9]

Two months earlier a U.S. Defense Department news source reported this from Jones:

“U.S. Naval Forces Europe, (the command’s) lead component in this
initiative, has developed a robust maritime security strategy and
regional 10-year campaign plan for the Gulf of Guinea region.

“Africa’s vast potential makes African stability a near-term global
strategic imperative.” [10]

Jones “raised the prospect of NATO taking a role to cou
nter piracy off the coast of the Horn of Africa and the Gulf of Guinea, especially when it threatens energy supply routes to Western nations” in April of 2006 and the Pentagon and NATO have followed through on his pledge and exactly in those two opposite ends of Africa.

At article a few days ago by Daniel Volman, director of the African
Security Research Project in Washington, DC, called “Africa: U.S.
Military Holds War Games on Nigeria, Somalia” provided details on how far plans by James Jones and the Pentagon have progressed over the past three years.

Working with what sketchy information that had been made public about Unified Quest 2008, last year’s rendition of what the U.S. Army web site described in an article of this year under the title of and as “Army war games for future conflicts” [11], conducted by the United States Army War College, Volman’s article included this information:

“In addition to U.S. military officers and intelligence officers,
Unified Quest 2008 brought together participants from the State
Department and other U.S. government agencies, academics, journalists, and foreign military officers (including military representatives from several NATO countries, Australia, and Israel), along with the private military contractors who helped run the war games: the Rand Corporation and Booz-Allen.

“The list of options for the Nigeria scenario ranged from diplomatic
pressure to military action, with or w thout the aid of European and
African nations. One participant, U.S. Marine Corps Lieutenant Colonel
Mark Stanovich, drew up a plan that called for the deployment of
thousands of U.S. troops within 60 days….

“Among scenarios examined during the game were the possibility of direct American military intervention involving some 20,000 U.S. troops in order to ’secure the oil,’ and the question of how to handle possible splits between factions within the Nigerian government. The game ended without military intervention because one of the rival factions executed a successful coup and formed a new government that sought stability.

General Ward “[W]hen General Ward [AFRICOM commander] appeared before the House Armed Services Committee on March 13, 2008, he cited America’s growing dependence on African oil as a priority issue for Africom and went on to proclaim that combating terrorism would be ‘Africom’s number one theater-wide goal.’ He barely mentioned development, humanitarian aid, peacekeeping or conflict resolution. [12]

In addition to nations already shelled, targeted and threatened like
Somalia, Sudan, Zimbabwe and Eritrea, even long-time and staunch U.S. military allies like Nigeria are not beyond the reach of hostile
Pentagon action. Nigeria is the main power in the fifteen-nation
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which over the past nine years has deployed troops to Sierra Leone, Liberia and Cote d’Ivoire on the request of the West, but that loyalty will not protect it when its own moment arrives.

The U.S. has employed other countries as regional military proxies -
Ethiopia and Djibouti in Northeast Africa, Rwanda in Central Africa,
Kenya in both - and has designs on South Africa, Senegal and Liberia
for similar purposes.

Since its establishment in October of 2007 AFRICOM has lost little time in marking out the Pentagon’s new continent.

Even prior to its formal activation the Pentagon conducted the Africa
Endeavor 2008 23-nation military exercise with forces from Benin,
Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mali, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sweden, Uganda, the U.S. and Zambia as well as representatives from ECOWAS and the African Union. [13]

The operation was held under the auspices of the U.S. European Command at the time as AFRICOM wasn’t activated until October of that year but it included the participation of the then fledgling AFRICOM and U.S. Marine Forces Europe (MARFOREUR), U.S. Air Forces in Europe and the Marine Headquarters, Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa [14], but “Next year’s exercise will be sponsored by U.S. Africa Command.” [15]

This January the U.S. Department of Defense announced that “The U.S.
Army Southern European Task Force [SETAF] officially has assumed its new role as the Army component for=20U.S. Africa Command.”

The Pentagon web site from which the above quote is taken also provided this background information and portents of the future:

“Since the 1990s, SETAF has worked with African nations to conduct
military training and provide humanitarian relief in countries such as Liberia, Rwanda, Uganda, Congo and the former Zaire. [Congo is the former Zaire, as Zaire was the former Belgian Congo]

“In the coming years, SETAF, operating as U.S. Army Africa, will
continue to grow and build capacity to meet the requirements needed to coordinate all U.S. Army activities in Africa.

“[U.S. Army Africa] is not an episodic, flash in the pan,noncombative
evacuation operation.” [16]

In the same month, demonstrating another new AFRICOM component and the continent-wide reach of the American military and its recently acquired client states, it was reported that “Air Force C-17s will soon begin airlifting special equipment for Rwandan Peacekeepers in the Darfur region of Sudan, marking the kickoff of the first major operation engineered by U.S. Africa Command’s air component, Seventeenth Air Force, also known as U.S. Air Forces Africa.” [17]

This May the newspaper of the American Armed Forces, Stars and Stripes, carried a feature on joint U.S.-British training of the Rwandan army, one which bears a large part of the blame for the deaths of over five million Congolese since 1998: The biggest loss of life in20a nation related to armed conflict since tens of millions of Chinese and Soviets were killed during World War II.

Rwandan and Ugandan troops invaded Congo in 1998 and triggered ongoing cross-border fighting which persists to this day. Rwanda and Uganda are both U.S. and British military client states.

The Stars and Stripes feature detailed that American instructors “are
currently working with a team from the British army to train
instructors with the Rwandan army. Those instructors will then train
their own troops — many of whom will serve as peacekeepers in places such as Sudan.” [18]

It quoted a British officer, Maj. Charles Malet, who “leads a
contingent of British forces based in Kenya,” as saying “We’ve been
producing short-term training in this part of the world for a long,
long time. [U.S. Africa Command] has stood [up]. It’s great to link up
and provide a sort of introduction.” [19]

The training of the Rwandan armed forces by the United States and its NATO allies has less to do with Darfur than it does with devastated Congo.

In November of 2008 the United Nations reported that “Rwandan forces fired tank shells and other heavy artillery across the border at
Congolese troops during fighting” [20] which began when former
Congolese general Laurent Nkunda staged an armed rebellion in the east of the country which led to the displacement of 200,000 civilians.

The BBC revealed at the time that “journalists report that some of
Laurent Nkunda’s rebel fighters are in the pay of the Rwandan army.

“This has renewed fears that the fighting will see a re-run of the
five-year Congolese war, which involved nine nations, before itended
in 2003.” [21]

The British Financial Times conducted interviews with “former rebels and observers on the ground” who said that “the uprising – led by Laurent Nkunda, the renegade former Congolese general – relies heavily on recruitment in Rwanda and former or even active Rwandan soldiers.”

Referring to Rwandan President Paul Kagame, the report added, “Mr Nkunda and Rwanda’s government, military and business elite share a history….Mr Nkunda, a Congolese Tutsi, was an intelligence officer in the guerrilla army that Mr Kagame, a Rwandan Tutsi, used to…seize power.

“Mr Kagame launched invasions of Congo in 1996 and 1998 and supported uprisings….” [22]

The following month a U.S. congressional delegation “traveled to Rwanda and Ethiopia to meet with U.S. ambassadors, AFRICOM officials and various ministers of each country, including Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and Rwanda Foreign Minister Charles Murigande.” [23]

Ethiopia invaded Somalia on America’s behest three years ago and
Rwanda’s repeated incursions into Congo could not have occurred without a green light from Washington.

As an Ugandan commentary at the time of the latest attack
on Congo from Rwanda stated, “London, New York and Paris are among the top consumers of minerals from Congo. They lecture humanity on the need to uphold
human rights and the sanctity of property rights whilst their thirstfor strategic minerals unleashes terror on innocent women and children
in Eastern Congo.” [24]

Last week an AFRICOM spokesman announced that “The United States military will be sending experts to the war-torn eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo this week.” The initial deployment will be small, he added, but “more may follow….” [25] AFRICOM would be better advised to monitor the activities of the Rwandan military it trains and arms.

Also last week the Pentagon stated it was deploying “unmanned
reconnaissance aircraft in the skies above the Seychelles archipelago” in the Indian Ocean near Madagascar and AFRICOM commander General William Ward said, “We have the recent arrival of our P-3 Orion maritime patrol aircraft that will aid in conducting the surveillance of Seychelles territorial waters and as we look into the future, (we will) bring unmanned surveillance vehicles.” [26]

Two days later Ward said “that the rise of radical Islamist militant
group al-Shabab in Somalia makes East Africa a central focus of the
U.S. military on the continent.”

Voice of America added:

“General William Ward has pledged continued support to Somalia’s
transitional federal government….He made his remarks duri
ng a visit to Nairobi, Kenya, which is a key U.S. ally in region.” [27]

Until last October Africa was the only continent other than Australia
and Antarctica without a U.S. military command. The fact that one has now been established indicates that Africa has achieved heightened importance for the Pentagon and its Western military allies.

An analysis of why Africa is a major focus of attention and why now
rather than earlier was provided by U.S.-based writer Paul I. Adujie in the New Liberian on August 21:

“America’s Africa Command, in conceptual terms and actual
implementation, is not intended to serve Africa’s best interests. It
just happens that Africa has grown in geopolitical and geo-economic
importance to America and her allies. Africa has been there all along.

“There were, for instance, reports of how the American military, acting supposedly in partnership or cooperation with the Nigerian military, literally took over Nigerian Defense Headquarters….

“It is probably important to mention that the United States already
operates at least three other commands, namely, the European Command (EUCOM), Central Command (CENTCOM) and Pacific Command (PACOM), therefore the Africa Command or (AFRICOM) will be the fourth leg of US military global spread.

“America’s Africa Command is…machinery for Western governments to pursue their vaunted economic, political and hegemonic hemispheric influence at the expense of Africans as well as a backdoor through which Westerners can outmaneuver rivals such as China and perhaps Russia in addition.” [28]

Notes

1) The Anti-Empire Report, August 4th, 2009
http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer72.html
2) Real Clear Politics, February 8, 2009
3) Agence France-Presse, November 30, 2008
4) Reuters, November 27, 2006
5) U.S. Department of Defense, August 18, 2006
6) Associated Press, June 21, 2006
7) Reuters, June 22, 2006
Associated Press, April 24, 2006
9) Trend News Agency, May 3, 2006
10) U.S. Department of Defense, March 8, 2006
11) www.army.mil, May 6, 2009
12) AllAfrica.com, August 14, 2009
13) United States European Command, July 29, 2008
14) United States European Command, July 16, 2008
15) United States European Command, July 29, 2008
16) U.S. Department of Defense, American Forces Press Service, January
28, 2009
17) U.S. Air Forces in Europe, January 9, 2009
18) Stars And Stripes, May 24, 2009
19) Ibid
20) Associated Press, November 3, 2008
21) BBC News, November 13, 2008
22) Financial Times, November 11, 2008
23) Times-Journal, December 8, 2008
24) Sunday Monitor (Uganda), November 9, 2008
25) Daily Nation (Kenya), August 18, 2009
26) Reuters, August 19, 2009
27) Voice of America News, August 21, 2009
28) New Liberian, August 21, 2009

Posted in Articles | Print | 2 Comments »

OPEN LETER TO ELENI GABRE MEDHIN THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE IS A TPLF MAFIA OPERATION

18. August 2009 by Assimba.

Berhanu Iqube Giorgis

Weizero Eleni,

I read with interest you long article trying to justify yourself and to cast yourself as a Bulge and not as a Tigre as some people may have stated when dealing with your nefarious role as head of the so called Ethiopian Commodity Exchange. As you did try to explain, the ethnic origin of any person is not really that important if only the TPLF you so loyally serve had not made it the main and primordial issue of Ethiopian political and economic life. In Other words, what is important is not the fact that you are Tigrean born but that you are a loyal serve of the TPLF and especially the robber baron Meles Zenawi.

The so called Ethiopian Commodity Exchange is a means to assure the economic stranglehold and domination of the TPLF over the Ethiopian economy much as the EFFORT conglomeration is doing. Your role is to assure this and nothing else. Of some 85 companies who have forked out the thousands of Birr to have a seat in the commodity exchange (ECE), 63 are TPLF owned big companies like Guna or front men of the TPLF. The independent private groups are tiny ones helpless in the face of the Guna giant which deals with hundreds of millions of Birr. You surely know ho Guna sold the Ethiopian wheat reserve to Egypt via the Sudan ( the Tigrean former GTZ truck drivers now employed by Sebhat Nega doing the transport) and earned millions if dollars while buying replacement wheat from South African on loan. You also know how these Sebhat hired truck drivers were once paid by Sebhat Nega with cocaine confiscated from Nigerian mules/ transporters and how they sold this cocaine in Addis to earn thousands of Birr.

Weizero Eleni, you head one of the most dangerous bodies for the total robbery of Ethiopia’s agricultural produces to benefit the Tigrean bourgeoisie. The aim of your CE is to monopolize the market/ sale of Ethiopia’s agricultural produce ranging from coffee to sesame and more. The damaging effect of your activity on coffee traders is already known. The control of sesame production (Humera and other places) by the TPLF and the exclusive sale of this through the commodity exchange is also known. Through the ECE you head, the TPLF is trying to assume full control of the Ethiopian agricultural production and market and to prolong its anti people rule. That is your role that no amount of demagogy or “I am an Ethiopian” trumpeting cannot hide. You are not an Ethiopian but a rabid Weyane up there with Ethiopia-haters like Meles and Sebhat. The twelve or so independent companies who have a seat in the commodity exchange are covers for you and the TPLF, they get crumbs as the main market is controlled by the 62 or so TPLF companies with millions of stolen Birr.

Weizero Eleni when the day of judgment comes and if you have not managed to flee your place will be in the dock and then we shall be delighted to hear you explain how you were a patriotic Ethiopian while you helped and abetted the TPLF in destroying the Ethiopian economy and perpetuating the rule of ethnic chauvinists.

Posted in Articles | Print | 1 Comment »

Eritreans versus Ethiopians: choosing sides?

8. August 2009 by Assimba.

SOLUTIONS WITH DEBTERAW, XXIII (13)

Call me by my name, address or title

By Obo Arada Shawl alias Wolde Tewolde

 

August 13, 2009

 

“You have a Republic if you can handle it”

(Thomas Jefferson, President)

You can’t handle the truth”

(Jack Nickelson, comedian)

 

The above quotations should be born in mind when we discuss issues of Eritreans with Ethiopians. The first quotation was in response to a question “what do we get?” posed by a woman who was waiting for Thomas Jefferson to announce the type of government American should have. The second was quoted from a film titled “A few good men”, an answer for Tom Cruise’s question.

 

In the Eritrean case, PIA (President Issayas Afeworki) has delivered to the Eritreans what they wanted – Haar’net or Nazanet - whichever it is, I cannot figure it out.

 

In the Ethiopian case, the so-called politicians, remnants of the DERG regime and the apolitical individuals who seem disinterested not only in finding solutions to our people’s problem but also in distorting the true past history of the Ethiopian Revolution. Or alternatively they are against the Eway Revolution for fear of the unknown. In other words, these are the groups who cannot handle the truth that was set by DEBTERAW and his Revolutionary Party (EPRP).

 

It will be in the context of Independence versus Truth that I am putting myself into the current debate and discussion among the following contenders.

·       Shaleka Dawit vs. Saleh (Gadi) Johar

·       Hassan Umer Abdella vs. Elias Kifle

·       Neamin Zelleke vs. Tsegaye Kassa

·       Jember Mintesnot vs. Semere T Habtemariam

·       Zewge Fanta vs. Ayalsew

 

But before commenting on the pro and cons among and between these groups of individual’s opinions and value judgment, I have to re-post (I might add at the time that a couple of webmasters declined to post it) the following article that I have written almost ten years ago. I am forwarding it to be posted again hoping that will educate my readers to catch up with the current discussion and debate about Eritrea and Ethiopia.

 

 

AS IS, here is the article

DEMOCRATIZATION NOT RECONCILIATION

By Wolde Tewolde

13 January 2001

 

A little bit of history

My knowledge of ancient and medieval history on Eritrea, written or oral, has been very limited, but I have witnessed an era of history between the end of Italian colonialism and the beginning of the Millennium. Here is the summary.

 

For 1 month (2001-?), Eritreans are pleading for reconciliation/democratization

For 2 years  (1998-00), Eritreans were fighting for Territorial Demarcation

For 7 years  (1991-98), Eritreans were muddling for Economic Reconstruction

For 17 years (1974-91), Eritreans were seeking for self-determination, Democracy and Socialism

For 12 years (1962-74), Eritreans were combating Ethiopian annexation

For 10 years (1952-62) Eritreans were opposing UN Federal arrangement

For 11 years (1941-52), Eritreans were fighting against British Administration

For 51 years (1890-1941), Eritreans were fighting against Italian colonialism

 

All in all Eritreans have waged battles and wars for 110 years. But the most prominent armed guerrilla war went unabated for 30 years (1961-1991) thanks to Awate’s single bullet. It was an era of mission and vision but not of value.

 

B-13 group has motivated me to write. Although their analysis of the Eritrean condition was fairly accurate, B-13’s characterization of the situation as ‘national crisis’ was incorrect and hence their call for national unity and reconciliation were inappropriately alarming and perhaps deceptive. Nevertheless, one has to give them credit for speaking out loud.

 

If we accept that Eritreans struggled against Italian Colonialism, British Administration, self-rule, Ethiopian oppression and Tigrean mass deportation for over a century, when was the real national crisis? Was it at the beginning, the middle or the end? I leave this to the reader. We cannot discount the fact that TPLF or EPRDF however you want to call them have endorsed the Referendum for Eritrean Independence. The only thing that we are unable to ascertain is whether the battle at Badme were meant to be as a jumpstart for TPLF’s hidden agenda or simply a test of the waters by the PFDJ for asserting their power on the ground. This will definitely take time to find out. However we take it Eritreans, under no circumstance, were in a national crisis at the end of 1^st Millennium. B-13’s characterization as ‘national crisis’ was totally wrong and misleading. B-13 demanded for national debate, and it is a common sense that there should be no national debate during such crisis. May be this is a la Eritrean academicians and medical doctors, I do not know. I am hoping now that B-13 will continue to demand a National debate and not back off from their previous demand.

 

I have promised my readers to air my thoughts and opinions on each of the three issues.

 

Out of the eight topical issues and concerns raised by the B-13, only three deserve proper attention for public debate. These are the followings:

1. National Unity and Reconciliation
2. Collective Leadership and
3. The Constitution

 

For this month, I am dealing with the first issue of unity and reconciliation.

 

NUR (National Unity and Reconciliation)

In my article of 13 December 2000, I have indicated that National Unity for Eritreans was achieved with the culmination of a National War that was fought not only at Badme but also in all Fronts. The war was perceived as a reversal from the incorrect stand by the TPLF organizational theory of Ethiopian colonialism. The TPLF has also blurred the correct stand of self-determination as proposed by the Revolutionary party of Ethiopians and Eritreans with that of their colonial theory. An additional factor, which blurred the rationale for war between the EPLF and TPLF, was that both organizations proclaimed as Marxists determined to fight Imperialism both that of the United States and the Soviet Union. The real war between Eritrea and Ethiopia under these ‘Liberators’ liberation was fought for confusion (hidden agenda). At best the TPLF with the Ad whites at the helm desperately desired to gain access to the Red Sea and make Ethiopia a “prosperous country” or at worst to bring down the Ham knights who want to keep Eritreans at a “poverty level”. Who knows may be the Ad whites thought that the Ham knights were Italians to be given lessons after 115 years? I do not know. Just the same, for the majority of Ethiopians the War was fought for their National flag (rainbow) and for their ethnic identity (ED). Access to the Red Sea was not an issue for the majority of Ethiopians.

 

EPLF’s wars against Yemen, Djibouti, Sudan and Ethiopia were fought not for acquisition of lands but perhaps for an assertion of national colonial independence. These small wars were the real tests for Independence of Eritrea from invaders (socialists), intruders (proponents of democracies) or from colonizers (imperialists) all mixed up in a bug. Just the same, for the majority of Eritreans, the Red Sea and the city of Asmara symbolized not only their survival but also as their national identity. As a result the identical issue of pride and security was finally sealed with the accommodation of thousands of mass deported of Eritrean origin from all over Ethiopia. National unity of a different kind unparalleled in their history was achieved.

 

If the unity of purpose was achieved, why then B-13 and others are asking for a unity and reconciliation? Really where is the confusion coming from? As indicated in the brief history of struggle, most Eritreans had a straightforward kind of methodology of combat with the single exception of the future that is understandable. The answer lies, I believe, between the years of 1974-1991. This was the time when Eritreans and Ethiopians were floundering for NDS (Nationalism, Democracy and Socialism). If this is so we need a re-examination of the class struggle, democracy and capitalism.

 

It is obvious that people can be confused with so many fundamental issues for so many years and it is also understandable for many people to blame one another and demand for an immediate Reconciliation because in their minds and hearts, reconciliation is synonymous with peace. Once the fuzzy questions of NDS (Nationalism, Democracies and Socialism) are finally cleared to the majority of Eritreans and Ethiopians, prescription will be simple. Why do we need reconciliation, will reconciliation bring peace? The answer probably is no.

 

What is reconciliation anyway?

The world is a better place without confrontation but whenever confrontation arises reconciliation is the solution. Most nations and individuals believe it is better to gain from stability rather than from chaos. What is reconciliation then? Reconciliation follows confrontation. As pointed earlier, Eritrean organizations were involved in recruiting their members by a) by educating b) by tricking and c) by threatening. I do not have facts and figures as to how many Eritreans were educated for what they were fighting for, how many were cheated and how many were threatened to join. Whatever has happened, the nationalists got what they wanted. That means that they are automatically reconciled with the nation of Eritrea (The authorities prefer to call it a State, do not ask me why). On the other hand, some so-called old enemies were allowed to enter Asmara freely without any reprimand. At least, I have not heard of no one who was not welcomed or put into prison because he/she visited his/her native land. But on the other, I have heard tons of stories about others who refused to follow EPLF’s line of ideology, market and religious practice, to say the least, who were harassed.

 

Is it the wrong say to oppose petitioning, reconciliation, fighting or democratization? What is the right way?

Awate opted for an armed struggle and it was clearly to redress the annexation by Ethiopia. This took a little over 40 years. The irony is that fortunately or unfortunately, EPLF has carried out ELF’s mission of Independence from colonization and annexation (Haa’rnet). Simultaneously, the group of C-13 of Cairo had initiated a professed dream of struggle for Eritrean peace, democracy, and Independence. Fighting and Independence go hand in hand as we saw in C-13’s vision and Awate’s mission.

 

What about Democracy and Justice?

PFDJ has the correct name for pursuing the issues of democracy and justice. So far, the Party or the Organization has not lived up to its true name, as it is neither involved in democratizing nor in creating social justice. The PFDJ is reportedly involved in a sort of business venture neither entrenched in private nor in social nature but in a mixed sort of economy (I do not understand what it means for today’s world). Anyhow Democracy and Justice should go hand in hand. EPLF has gun in one hand and democracy and/or justice in the other.

 

What about Reconciliation and Democratization?

These two concepts are interchangeable. The lack of understanding democratization process will leave us for reconciliation option only. Followings are some samples why reconciliation is essential and urgent.

1. Awate.com’s mission statement calls for “the reconciliation between the past and present”.
2. Gebre Fesshazion: the Reconciliation theory and the Eritrean culture of debate of December 01, 2000 write, as “The Eritreans are the most unified people in the continent”. Gebre continued to argue, “Nowadays the issue of democracy is the hot spot among Eritreans in the Diaspora. No one disagree about it; but everyone can be different about the time of its implementation. Eritrea does not need reconciliation”. Again Gebre clearly confuses politics with policy issues.
3. Men hot Woldemariam in his articles of Reconciliation and National unity, calls reconciliation a vital term in Eritrean politics.

 

What about petitioning and crisis management?

When the so-called national crisis emerged, B-13 presented rather E-mailed their petition and demanded for a crisis management. These two concepts let alone to be interchangeable; they do not go hand in hand. By the way, how many of those 13 in Cairo or in Berlin were Democrats, Independents or Socialists? Some on should figure it out. But after 1991, there was no discussion of about Democracy, Socialism not even about the nature of capitalism. Everyone was for grubbing material wealth at any cost.

 

A little bit of advice for all Eritreans

On the one hand, compassionate and informed people whether Ethiopians or foreigners of any country admire the tenancy and endurance of the Eritrean people. While on the other, mean and uninformed Ethiopians and foreigners will loathe your perseverance and desire for liberty and equality. But above all, there are real people who wonder when the EERA (Eritrean Educated, Refugee and Asylee) will come to an end. An acquaintance of mine from the Jewish Community told me to be imperfect. He said that Christ was perfect and that was why he was crucified. Human beings can only be in excellence. God may be “slow to anger and yet quick to forgive.” Thing about this wisdom.

 

What do we need for final solution? I can present three areas of concern for discussion

1. FAMATA
2. MAN
3. WRT

 

The above acronyms will be discussed in future articles.

 

Menhot named our situation as “collective insanity” I prefer to call it “collective ignorance”. I know many readers rather “hearer” will be offended, but take it easy, the world is much simpler than the previous full century.

 

According to the writer, quoting from a document ‘Nehanan Alamenan” – translated as “our objectives and we” might have put us in the wrong direction. Obviously, if it says we, then it doe not represent the Eritrean people (unless he is an emperor), it implies a section of the population.

 

I have not read the said document and I am not interested to read it. It sounds as a Machiavellian type of governance. Mr. Woldemariam pleads for reconciliation a la Mandela type. Both are not feasible. Machiavellian is buried for good by the Information Age. Mandela’s case is a case of race and discrimination. Eritren liberation is liberation from fear of retribution and a desire to share power. What are needed are ‘a la Democracia’, ‘a la Democracia’, and ‘a la Democracia’. What is Democracy? Every one of us should study and understand its history, concept and application. It is not enough to repeat the word.

 

As an opposition Party, ELF has a daunting task ahead for its members. First and foremost, they should regroup or reorganize and be formidable political party. I believe there are there main reasons for the ELF to become an opposition not a loyalist party.

1. ELF was the victims of aggression
2. It can redress what has been done by EPLF and
3. ELF members can feel elevated that they were part of the long struggle for national independence and now they can be part of the reconstruction effort.

 

But before anything else, ELF should democratize itself internally. For without justice and democratization, ther is Eritrea without Eritreans.

 

Conclusion

We have to equate democracy building with reconciliation. If Eritreans don’t want democracy, then they do not need reconciliation. But I know many want reconciliation. So stop that nonsense that democracy is not for Eritrea.

 

Democratization and democracies is the solution for Eritreans and its neighbor. Young people can learn from mistakes. Old people like myself do not seem to be learning from past failures.

Eritreans and Ethiopians should do the following: -

1. Avoid the culture of blaming
2. Stop giving excuses for everything
3. Avoid negative attitudes

 

To be continued …with Commentary

 

Posted in Articles | Print | 1 Comment »

TPLF/EPRDF is eating itself Alive!

8. August 2009 by Assimba.

By Melesse AdaneSuccess story is no more; the crisis within the powerhouses continues, so is the prospect of Ethiopian revolution.  More often than not, both convulsion from within and a revolution from outside are the factors that amount to the final disintegration of tyrannical regimes. When a push comes to shove the powerhouses, both the parliament and the congregation from within will be no more.  In a ways, any given tyrant regime that takes control of a state power without legal sanction and rules the nation with an absolute power is prone to collapse gradually if not suddenly, as a result of convulsion from within and a revolution from without.  In this case, the current Ethiopia’s socioeconomic crisis aside, the damage already done by an internal conflict from within TPLF/EPRDF and the church led by Aba Paulous is a signal that the tyrannical regime led by Meles is growing fade by the day and blinking dim on a daily basis.  Eventually, though it appears that the tyrant regime is about to cease to exist. 

Firstly, given that there is tension in both powerhouses led by Meles  of TPLF in the palace and Aba Poulous of the religious Commerce in the church, the opposition must incite those who opposed to Meles’s dictatorial regime into action.  They also must call upon them to stand in solidarity with the people against Mele’s regime and as well agitate the public to be watchful and ready to deal with whatever comes next.  For sure, the on going internal conflict would undermine TPLF/EPRDF’S organizational strengths and technical support it happens to preserve from within.  And in due time the civil disobedience popular with both young and old, audiences shall reinforce the internal conflict and finally put an end to the ethnocentric dictatorial regime in Ethiopia. Although revolution may have generated many competing theories in the past still it is bound to be the only way to do away with tyrannical regimes and their domineering way of life. Be it the French Revolution, Russian Revolution, American Revolution, Ethiopian Revolution, Industrial Revolution, Agrarian Revolution, Gunpowder or Protestant Revolution, all of them were about change.   Radical Change now!  Therefore, revolution is a must now both to reflect on the current understanding of our situation in Ethiopia and the complex phenomenon the tyrant regime brought us to rule our country with an iron fist. 

Secondly, in order to intensify the conflict amongst enemy camps, one would capitalize more on the wisdom of Ethiopian society.  It is true that the wisdom of Ethiopians is prevailing against the unfounded hatred, fear and mistrust TPLF has been trying to make us feel.  Meaning Ethiopians continue to feel and behave in a manner that benefit all in the family, and continue to adjust actions and deeds in response to the desires and needs of their links.  And moreover, together Ethiopians do praise Ethiopian nationalism by raising their flag instead of being divided and weak by an enemy.  In other words, they happen to show their devotion to their motherland and her interests as opposed to those narrow nationalists whose excessive and fanatical devotion is tribal and rival of the nation of Ethiopia itself.  To that effect, Ethiopians continue to carry on the unity slogan and as they move forward they mutually give enthusiastic approval to the motto of one flag, one nation and one people.  Isn’t that true that Ethiopian flag is much more popular than it was then during the previous regimes?  Together they manage to refuse to comply with the newly piece of legislation against their flag passed by so-called Ethiopian parliament is a case in point.  So in this case, Ethiopian wisdom says it all that Ethiopians embracing Ethiopian nationalism will come victor at the end as had had happened in Adawa, Mekidela and many other battlegrounds wherein Ethiopians of all walks of life engaged in an armed conflict and defended their common territory against foreign aggressions in the past. Likewise, as ever before, Ethiopian national anthem together with Ethiopian flag will be praised by all Ethiopians regardless.  Because, both Ethiopian national anthem and flag are symbolically popular, associated with their greater Ethiopian identity , period, and cause of all time .  Moreover, Ethiopian national anthem will have taken place to celebrate a sense of solidarity Ethiopians enjoyed for centuries as opposed to that of narrow nationalists’ song sung to shed tears for a Killil territory

Be that as it may, would it matter whether or not Meles said “I will leave power”?  After all, convincing his likes of something that is not true at all is what Meles is good at.  Based on that , one would conclude that it may be is a mixed signal he wants to send us, one is to trick us thereby to buy time and the other possibility is for sure that he is desperate to the point where he loses hope.  But altogether we can agree on that TPLF/EPRDF is in a serious internal strife as we speak.  As the last resort, however, he will do anything possible to save his power but in vain.  Because, it appears that time is not on his side anymore.  And also, all the indications we see show as that that the decline and fall of the ethnocentric dictatorial regime in Ethiopia is near.  Upon his departure , however, the new era of hope shall began in Ethiopia, a hope that things will turn out well for all Ethiopians to live together and that good will ultimately triumph over evil in the land of Ethiopia.  To that end, given that Meles of TPLF is squeezed in between and overwhelmed with a great deal of urgency and anxiety from within, the oppositions together with the general public must take the  advantage of the situation sooner than later. 

And then it is up to the oppositions and the public at large to exploit the situation at hand and move on. as it happens, a ground breaking revolution is necessary, and then, unity, organization and strong leadership are the most important continuities the public need in order to remove TPLF/EPRDF out of power and replace it with a new and democrat system of government. After all, “violence” is inevitable in Ethiopia so long as TPLF/EPRDF is in power. As the offensive intrusion of TPLF/EPRDF against the will of the public unfolds, taking precautionary protective measures on the part of the public to safeguard its civil liberties is inevitable.  So much so, the people of Ethiopia in general and the genuine oppositions in particular have every right to react in response to WOYANES violent act.   Collectively, we should defy and defy now to the ethnocentric dictatorial regime of Meles Zenawi and Aba Paulous of his own kind. 

In conclusion, the, rundown powerhouse of ethnocentric dictatorship in tandem with its mischievous political philosophy needs to get battered down by a unified force.  A unified force led by Long Standing Political organizations; a unified force that is prepared to resist, to control, and vanquish that of a body of politics called Killil is needed to take over and lead the revolution to victory.  Replacing KILLIL with some broad based government in Addis Ababa is also the first safety measure that our unified forces led by our Long Standing Political Parties have to take on and work to that end.  And also, as mutual trust and confidence are the true interests of Ethiopians, the said upcoming broad based government has to pick up where mutual trust and confidence are celebrated and put in place to boost the Morales of our compatriots and Ethiopian society as a whole.  To that end, what is expected of Ethiopians of all walks of life is nothing but becoming more unified than ever before. Ethiopians are believed to be defiant to all forms of tyrant regimes.  They dethroned the king and unseated the military junta.  Two are down and one more go. An all out war against the ethnocentric dictatorial regime must begin now by intensifying rumors of Meles’ resignation and accelerating the fall of his tyrannical regime in Addis. 

 

Enachenifallen!!

 

 

Posted in Articles | Print | 1 Comment »