by Abdi Ali Diriye
The U.S. Africa Command bills itself as a force for “humanitarian” intervention in Africa – but the only humans it serves are outside the continent. “The US has recently pushed itself into Libya, Uganda, Somalia, Sudan and elsewhere, and now has its eyes set on Mali.”
Is AFRICOM Preparing for Another “Humanitarian” Military Intervention?
by Abdi Ali Diriye
This article previously appeared in Pambazuka News.
“The Anglo-American imperialists would like to eliminate competition for Africa’s bountiful resources.”
US President Barack Obama has been carrying the AFRICOM ball down the field after the directive was launched under George W. Bush in 2007. Washington DC, led by Africa Secretary Jonnie Carson, speaks to its public at a level deserving of an uninformed, Helen Keller-esque populace, claiming that Somalia was “a big success” because Washington spooks spent $500 million backing an African proxy force that allegedly “drove out al Qaeda” in that country. And it is no coincidence that massive untapped oil reserves in the Puntland region in north-eastern Somalia were announced in early 2012.
Just as Washington’s corporate interests are hidden behind “humanitarian interventions,” the UK Prime Minister David Cameron will run the same facade. In February he hosted an international conference on Somalia, where he pledged more aid, financial help and measures “to fight terrorism” in Somalia. Cameron does not tell you that those so-called terrorist forces are funded and supported, and ultimately steered by the Western intelligence agencies – whereby they control all sides of the local conflict.
Note they are using the same recycled narrative in Mali now, fighting “Islamic extremists” there – promoting freedom and democracy in the region, etc.
Mali’s vast potential wealth lies in mining, agricultural commodities and oil. And these proven reserves are not currently exploited. Interestingly enough, Ghana and Mali together account for 5.8 percent of total world gold production. These assets are the true focus of US and UK interests in Africa – not humanitarian concerns.
“Mali’s vast potential wealth lies in mining, agricultural commodities and oil.”
The 2012 Somalia Oil Conference was a mere pre-negotiation meeting to discuss how oil assets would be divided up between the US, UK and other remaining energy players – demonstrating what is the real agenda with AFRICOM. Obama supporters will naturally give this president a free pass on Africa because he is partly of African descent, not realizing that he is running the exact same agenda as his Republican predecessor. What corporate agents like Jonnie Carson do not tell electorate plebs is that the US has recently pushed itself into Libya, Uganda, Somalia, Sudan and elsewhere, and now has its eyes set on Mali.
The initial goal of US domination of Africa is outlined in the AFRICOM documents, and names the eviction of China from the continent as task number one.
Africa Pulse spells it out: “Strong economic growth in the past decade among African countries rich in oil and minerals has failed to make a significant dent on their poverty levels, according to a World Bank report.”
In other words, the Anglo-American imperialists would like to eliminate competition for Africa’s bountiful resources, continuing a centuries-old policy of raping the Dark Continent and leaving nothing but perpetual internal strife and poverty behind.
A hotel workers strike in California exposes anti-Black hiring practices, and the predation of the "gig" economy.
European nations refuse to acknowledge their crimes committed against colonized people. Germany's genocide against the Namibian people is just one such example of unconvincing apologies and refusals…
In this week’s segment we focus on two states, Venezuela and Eritrea, while we continue paying tribute to the late Glen Ford, co-founder and the driving force behind Black Agenda Report.
Booker Ngesa Omole is the National Vice-Chairperson and National Organizing Secretary of the Communist Party of Kenya, and a member of its National Central Committee.
Glen Ford analyzed a 2019 Democratic Party presidential debate and points out that support for U.S. aggression towards Venezuela and other nations is a bipartisan project.
