Thousands Disappear in DR Congo

Stunning news:

The first UN aid convoy to reach the heart of rebel-held territory in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo arrived yesterday to find refugee camps that had housed tens of thousands of people last week now standing empty.

Stunned aid workers described the camps around Rutshuru that had been sheltering as many as 50,000 people displaced by the relentless fighting, as levelled with all signs of building materials and people gone.

"All the camps are empty. They have all left," said Francis Nakwafio Kasai, a field officer with the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). "All the shelters have been destroyed ... nothing remains."

The BBC adds:

Aid workers found refugee camps that had held tens of thousands were virtually empty. Many people are believed to have fled into the forests around the camps fearing further violence.

While as many as 50,000 displaced people reached Goma, many others have tried to return to their homes on foot without safe shelter, food or water.

The recent rebel offensive was exacerbated by a wave of killing, looting and raping by retreating Congolese soldiers.

On Sunday afternoon, I was surprised to hear CNN anchor Don Lemon actually say at the top of the hour that they'd go straight to their election coverage because there was no other news. Well, guess what Don? There's a helluva more going on in the world than your election and whoever wins will have this growing humanitarian crisis to deal with and AFRICOM is (rightly) off to a very rocky start. Having been refused a permanent headquarters on the continent so far, it will remain based in Germany - and with good reason.

So, just how much attention will be paid to regional conflicts horrors like those in DR Congo and Darfur by a new American administration? And exactly how will that attention be given? African leaders are justified in their concern that the permanent presence of American military personnel on their land will only serve to bring up fears of western colonialism once again. They've been down that road before.

Meanwhile, as the power struggle continues, what will be done about these disappearing and dying refugees?

Related:
Congo's riches fuel its war
 

AFRICOM: African Military HQ Plans Dropped

Important news, as the BBC reports:

The US military has decided to keep the headquarters of its new Africa Command in Germany, after only one African nation, Liberia, offered to host it.

While Gen William 'Kip' Ward had tried to calm African leaders' fears by insisting that AFRICOM was just created to help Africa with "security" and "peacekeeping", well-founded concerns about a hidden agenda were expressed by African leaders:

There has been concern that Africom is really an attempt to protect US oil and mineral interests in Africa, amid growing competition for resources from Asian economies, says the BBC's Alex Last in the Nigerian capital Abuja.

Then there are fears about the continent being drawn into the US war on terror, our correspondent ads.

Now, in case you're of the opinion that this was just a Bush administration ploy to exercise American imperialist dominance on the continent, read the words of Barack Obama who, along with the other major Democratic presidential candidates, pledged support for AFRICOM. And you'll see that those "fears about the continent being drawn into the US war on terror" are grounded in reality as well:

AFRICOM, the new unified command, should serve to coordinate and synchronize our military activities with our other strategic objectives in Africa. Working under the foreign policy leadership of the State Department, this command should help to integrate military (especially non-lethal capabilities) with all the other elements of US power and diplomacy. AFRICOM should promote a more united and coordinated engagement plan for Africa.

Security cooperation at the AU and national level is extremely important, and the US military has made great strides in this area. This effort must be matched by a similar interagency commitment to enhance and fund a more robust “stability cooperation” program. Increased security depends on better governance and plans for long-term stability that foster a believable hope among Africans that tomorrow will be better. This means cleaner water, adequate food, better schools, available and affordable healthcare, improved infrastructure and communications, more employment opportunities, human rights, and total gender equality.

There will be situations that require the United States to work with its partners in Africa to fight terrorism with lethal force. Having a unified command operating in Africa will facilitate this action. That means AFRICOM must forge genuine military partnerships that are predicated on mutual respect and responsibility. There must be joint training exercises to ensure interoperability in operations and logistics. The effort against terrorists operating in Africa will require a joint and combined effort with African countries to achieve lasting mutual progress—that is one of AFRICOM’s missions.

An Obama Administration, therefore, will pursue an Africa policy that seeks to work with its partners in Africa to realize the goals of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. These include the eradication of poverty, putting Africa on a sustainable path of growth and development and reversing the marginalization of the continent in the global economy. An Obama Administration will work to help ensure that Africa is seen as a desirable destination for American trade and investment and that the continent is a priority for the United States. It will also work to ensure that transparency, accountability, and rule of law are widely upheld. An Obama Administration will pursue effective partnerships to combat terrorism while making the continent a safer and healthier place to live.

Contrast what Obama said about the US military plans for AFRICOM and what General Ward has said publically: "Gen Ward said Africom was not about militarisation..." That obviously is not what Obama has in mind with his statement about "interoperability".

The fact that Liberia's was the only government willing to host the AFRICOM base on the continent and that others have refused is a huge slap in the face to the US government. It's a rejection based on preserving African interests. Meanwhile, the Americans will continue to attempt to run their AFRICOM operations from Germany. The age of colonialism in one form or another lives on.

As a recent column NYT discussing a president's power to influence the economy concluded:

And if you’re still worrying about how to vote, I have two pieces of advice. First, spend your time studying foreign policy, where the president has more direct power, and the choice of a candidate makes a much bigger difference.

In this election, however, all of the candidates are reading from the same playbook when it comes to Africa's fate, so there is no choice. Perhaps they should heed the words of Uzodinma Iweala: Stop Trying To 'Save' Africa.

Related:

The controversy over Africom
 

Quote du Jour: The US Militarization of Africa

Via Guerilla News Network:

The Congressional Research Service’s latest accounting [PDF] of the Global War on Terrorism, of which AFRICOM would be a part, puts the cost at $611 billion since 2001, not including additional recent requests of $147 billion and another $50 billion.

For less than that $808 billion spent in the last six years, we could provide universal primary education, reduce infant mortality by two thirds and provide universal access to potable water and not just for the United States, but also for the world. These Millennium Development Goals have languished with sporadic investment and big promises, while military solutions to problems are funded robustly.

Reexamining this imbalance seems like a crucial first step. And the battle for African hearts and minds will not be won if it’s clear that it is being waged more for the sake of U.S. strategic interests than African needs.

I urge you to read the entire article.
 

Republicans Behaving Badly

You know your country's in trouble when:

- The Attorney General has to be subpoenaed in order to force him to cooperate in an investigation.

- White House officials are using secret e-mail accounts to hide what, exactly?

- The Theater of the Imperially Absurd runs your country's affairs (badly) while Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are still considered your friends. (Forget the fact that they're literally letting terrorists get away with murder.)

- 61% of your countrymen believe their safety at home does not depend on the outcome of the Iraq war, 51% want the troops to come home gradually within one year (poll link) while your president is busy pushing the Democrats to get their war funding bill to him as quickly as possible so he can just veto it and keep whining while people keep dying.

- Hunger-strikers are being force-fed at Gitmo, again.

- Cheney's former gold mine, Halliburton, is finally pulling out of Iran. Yes, Iran.

- Fill-in WH press sockpuppet Dana Perino tries to invoke 9/11 (video), spars with Helen Thomas and loses, predictably.

- The Bush administration is interrogating so-called terrorism suspects in Ethiopia (including at least one Canadian) while no one is really paying attention. (Keep an eye on AFRICOM developments. The Middle East isn't the only region that the Bush administration is trying to manipulate and control.)

One American intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the matter, said that the interviews in Ethiopia had produced "valuable information." It would have been "irresponsible" for the United States to give up the opportunity to interrogate suspects who could have information about Al Qaeda in the Horn of Africa, the official added.

Paul Gimigliano, a CIA spokesman, declined to give details about the agency's activities in the region, but said that the "CIA acts boldly yet legally, alone and with partners, just as our government and people expect us to."

And people might actually believe that if congress hadn't given CIA agents immunity from prosecution for torture last year.

- This is indicative of "celebrating" the fall of Baghdad 4 years ago:



- The Republicans just can't admit they've completely run out of ideas.

Robert Fisk:

Faced with an ever-more ruthless insurgency in Baghdad - despite President George Bush's "surge" in troops - US forces in the city are now planning a massive and highly controversial counter-insurgency operation that will seal off vast areas of the city, enclosing whole neighbourhoods with barricades and allowing only Iraqis with newly issued ID cards to enter.

The campaign of "gated communities" - whose genesis was in the Vietnam War - will involve up to 30 of the city's 89 official districts and will be the most ambitious counter-insurgency programme yet mounted by the US in Iraq.

The system has been used - and has spectacularly failed - in the past, and its inauguration in Iraq is as much a sign of American desperation at the country's continued descent into civil conflict as it is of US determination to "win" the war against an Iraqi insurgency that has cost the lives of more than 3,200 American troops. The system of "gating" areas under foreign occupation failed during the French war against FLN insurgents in Algeria and again during the American war in Vietnam. Israel has employed similar practices during its occupation of Palestinian territory - again, with little success.

Any questions? Surge on.