The Obama administration is expanding its intelligence operations in sub-Saharan Africa, according to a lengthy report in the Washington Post. The increased surveillance is part of rapidly expanding military operations in Africa that are being carried out under the pretext of the “war on terror,” but are directed in large part at countering rising Chinese economic connections on the resource-rich continent.
The focus of the Post’s report was on aerial surveillance programs used to gather intelligence on local militant groups. The vast majority of these operations are being run by private companies, which are responsible for supplying pilots, sensor operators, intelligence analysts, mechanics, and linguists.
According to the report, about a dozen airbases have been developed in Africa since 2007. These bases are generally small additions to existing airfields in various African countries and are used to run small aircraft, disguised as private planes, and equipped with discreet surveillance equipment. Permission for these operations is usually granted by the local government in exchange for the US sharing the intelligence it gathers.
The program targets a wide variety of different groups on the pretext of combating terrorism. These include the loose affiliation of Tuareg secessionists and Islamists in Northern Mali, the Lord’s Resistance Army in Central Africa, and al-Shabab in Southern Somalia. Although humanitarian concerns and the threat of global terrorism are being used to justify these operations, they in reality comprise part of a new Scramble for Africa, as the US and Europe compete over the area’s natural resources and seek to minimize Chinese influence.
In particular, the Post report cited two targets of growing interest on the part of the US military: Boko Haram in Nigeria, and the Lord’s Resistance Army’s operations in Sudan and South Sudan. In the case of Nigeria, which provides over 8 percent of the United States’ crude oil, the economic motivation for “anti-terrorism” is particularly clear.
Since the very beginning of AFRICOM’s operations, the US has been preparing plans for possible military intervention in Nigeria. In 2008, the US Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania conducted a series of “wargame scenarios” concerning possible interventions for AFRICOM, and estimated that it would take 20,000 troops to control the Niger Delta oilfields. At a February 18, 2008 AFRICOM conference, Vice Admiral Robert T. Moeller stated that the guiding principle of AFRICOM was to protect “the free flow of natural resources from Africa to the global market.”
Only a month later, the first commander of AFRICOM, General William Ward, declared that due to the US’s increasing reliance on African oil, the “number one theater-wide goal” would be combating terrorism. Although the US did not intervene militarily, the political significance of AFRICOM’s preparations could be seen when millions of Nigerian workers participated in a general strike against president Goodluck Jonathan’s end to fuel subsidies. Jonathan used a series of bombings claimed by Boko Haram to institute martial law and suppress the growing strike movement.
In the case of the Lord’s Resistance Army, the argument for “humanitarian intervention” is used to provide a similar cover for economic aims. According to The Post, AFRICOM is seeking a base in South Sudan that would both support the hunt for the LRA’s leader Kony and allow the US greater influence in the growing conflict between Sudan and South Sudan.
At the center of the Sudanese conflict are disagreements over oil revenues. Since South Sudan gained independence in 2011 it has been in continuous conflict with Sudan over control of oil fields in the border region and the fees to be paid to Sudan, whose pipelines are the only conduit available to export its oil. In April, while Sudan and South Sudan were engaged in regular border skirmishes, South Sudanese president, Salva Kiir, traveled to China in an attempt to gather support for construction of an alternate pipeline through Kenya.
China is a major investor in both Sudanese and South Sudanese oil infrastructure. Through an increased military presence, the US government hopes to offset Chinese economic influence. Last year in her tour of Africa, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, said, “We don’t want to see a new colonialism in Africa,” in reference to Chinese influence on the continent.
Ultimately the aerial surveillance programs will be used to lay the groundwork for future military intervention. Last October, Obama deployed 100 military advisors to central Africa in order to work toward “the removal of Joseph Kony.” In Somalia, drones and special forces strikes are also being used to the same bloody effect as in Pakistan, Yemen, and Afghanistan. Although the surveillance program in West and Central Africa is currently unarmed, several officials quoted in the Post emphasized the potential to expand the program.
According to the report, AFRICOM already had plans for a drone program against the LRA, but it was canceled without explanation. Recently, however, the Senate Armed Forces Committee authorized $50 million to expand surveillance operations in Africa and emphasized the need for aircraft that can “loiter over areas of interest for extended periods of time,” i.e., drones. One anonymous US military official told the Post that if they wanted to fly drones “I’m certain we could get the access and overflight [permission] that is necessary to do that.”
Source: World Socialist Web Site
Showing posts with label Joseph Kony. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joseph Kony. Show all posts
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Friday, March 23, 2012
African Union to Make Push Against Rebels
The African Union announced Friday that it would launch a new regional military operation against the Lord’s Resistance Army, the vicious Ugandan rebel group that has been terrorizing parts of central Africa for more than 20 years. The operation, which aims to bring together 5,000 troops from four African countries each victimized by the Lord’s Resistance Army and its leader, Joseph Kony, will tap from troops already deployed to fight the group. But officials said the force will be more cohesive and disciplined.
“We’re on a mission,” an African Union envoy, Francisco Madeira, told reporters on Friday. “We need to stop Kony.”
The announcement came a few weeks after a YouTube video from an American advocacy organization went viral on the Internet and brought unprecedented attention to Mr. Kony, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for a range of unspeakable atrocities. The announcement also came a few days after a bipartisan group in Congress introduced a resolution condemning Mr. Kony and supporting a regional military effort from the four most victimized nations. The armies of those nations — Uganda, South Sudan, Central African Republic, and Democratic Republic of the Congo — have been fighting the L.R.A. since last year under a loosely organized effort. But some soldiers in those armies have resentments toward one another that have overshadowed their common goal of eradicating Mr. Kony’s group and arresting him.
The new operation announced Friday could offer a new beginning. Uganda said it would reallocate 1,500 of its troops currently fighting the L.R.A. in the Central African Republic under the new African Union operation, to be headed by Uganda, but it remained unclear how new troops would be brought in from the other nations, when they would arrive, and whether they would all be under a single military command. Headquarters for the operation will be in South Sudan, the world’s youngest and possibly most cash-hungry nation, and will include offices and administration.
The United States, which has participated in special operations against the rebel group in the past, last year sent 100 troops to Uganda and operational field locations to act a special advisers to the national forces, and reiterated its support on Friday for the regional military operation and its own “multi-year strategy.”
The African Union said Friday that its operation had been months in the planning, and would not stop until Mr. Kony was captured. The Lord’s Resistance Army has been murdering, mutilating and kidnapping children across East and Central Africa for decades, and has been the focus of numerous military operations, but while their atrocities were well known, the group did not come under their current widespread global scrutiny until the YouTube video. Uganda, which has complained of being drowned-out of the L.R.A. conversation since the video gained worldwide attention, was quick to distinguish the new effort, though it may not result in much change on the ground.
“The video excites those who have ignored African issues, otherwise it’s a joke,” said a Ugandan military spokesman, Col. Felix Kulayigye. “It is now A.U. that is in charge,” Colonel Kulayigye said, referring to the African Union. “The L.R.A. has always been there, it must be dead once and for all.”
Source: New York Times
“We’re on a mission,” an African Union envoy, Francisco Madeira, told reporters on Friday. “We need to stop Kony.”
The announcement came a few weeks after a YouTube video from an American advocacy organization went viral on the Internet and brought unprecedented attention to Mr. Kony, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for a range of unspeakable atrocities. The announcement also came a few days after a bipartisan group in Congress introduced a resolution condemning Mr. Kony and supporting a regional military effort from the four most victimized nations. The armies of those nations — Uganda, South Sudan, Central African Republic, and Democratic Republic of the Congo — have been fighting the L.R.A. since last year under a loosely organized effort. But some soldiers in those armies have resentments toward one another that have overshadowed their common goal of eradicating Mr. Kony’s group and arresting him.
The new operation announced Friday could offer a new beginning. Uganda said it would reallocate 1,500 of its troops currently fighting the L.R.A. in the Central African Republic under the new African Union operation, to be headed by Uganda, but it remained unclear how new troops would be brought in from the other nations, when they would arrive, and whether they would all be under a single military command. Headquarters for the operation will be in South Sudan, the world’s youngest and possibly most cash-hungry nation, and will include offices and administration.
The United States, which has participated in special operations against the rebel group in the past, last year sent 100 troops to Uganda and operational field locations to act a special advisers to the national forces, and reiterated its support on Friday for the regional military operation and its own “multi-year strategy.”
The African Union said Friday that its operation had been months in the planning, and would not stop until Mr. Kony was captured. The Lord’s Resistance Army has been murdering, mutilating and kidnapping children across East and Central Africa for decades, and has been the focus of numerous military operations, but while their atrocities were well known, the group did not come under their current widespread global scrutiny until the YouTube video. Uganda, which has complained of being drowned-out of the L.R.A. conversation since the video gained worldwide attention, was quick to distinguish the new effort, though it may not result in much change on the ground.
“The video excites those who have ignored African issues, otherwise it’s a joke,” said a Ugandan military spokesman, Col. Felix Kulayigye. “It is now A.U. that is in charge,” Colonel Kulayigye said, referring to the African Union. “The L.R.A. has always been there, it must be dead once and for all.”
Source: New York Times
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Congolese Warlord Convicted, in First for International Court
Thomas Lubanga, a rebel leader from the Democratic Republic of Congo, was found guilty on Wednesday of recruiting and enlisting boys and girls under the age of 15 and using them in war, in the first ruling by the International Criminal Court since it began its work 10 years ago.
The decision, which came after a halting, arduous three-year trial, firmly establishes as an international crime the use of children in war — a practice that still enslaves tens of thousands of the young. The ruling adds to the rush of attention to another suspect wanted by the court, Joseph Kony, the leader of the dwindling Lord’s Resistance Army, which for years turned abducted children into soldiers as it marauded through at least four central African countries. But it also underscores some of the failings and limits of the prosecution’s approach. The rebels under Mr. Lubanga’s command were known to have pillaged, raped and killed many civilians in enemy villages, but prosecutors said when he was handed to The Hague in 2006 that the best evidence they had was about child recruiting. The judges strongly reprimanded the prosecution on Wednesday, saying it had been negligent and had delegated investigations to unreliable paid go-betweens who had encouraged witnesses to give false testimony. Two of the three judges wrote dissenting opinions, which were not immediately released.
In a packed courtroom, Mr. Lubanga, 51, dressed in an elegant white ceremonial robe, looked down as the presiding judge, Adrian Fulford of Britain, said that the evidence had confirmed that he and fellow fighters had enlisted boys and girls, sometimes by force; put them through harsh training; punished them; deployed them in fighting; and subjected girls to sexual violence. Mr. Lubanga, who held a degree in psychology and once worked as a teacher and trader, went on to lead a rebel group in the Ituri region, where the local press reported that he asked every family to contribute a cow, money or a child to his militia. He told the court that he was only the political leader of the Union of Congolese Patriots and had discouraged deploying children. But the judges found that in 2002 and 2003, during a brutal ethnic conflict in the northeast of Congo, Mr. Lubanga also led his group’s military wing, provided weapons, ammunition, food and uniforms and made speeches in the Ituri region “encouraging children to join the army.” Videos presented in court showed Mr. Lubanga in training camps in the presence of uniformed children. Although the conflict in Ituri, fueled by rivalries for power and control over mineral riches, dated to the 1990s, the court’s jurisdiction only went into effect in 2002.
In the coming weeks, the court is expected to issue its sentence of Mr. Lubanga and hold hearings on reparations for his victims. He has 30 days to appeal the court’s verdict. The verdict was welcomed by human rights groups.
Navi Pillay, the South African who is the United Nations human rights commissioner, said that “for many years, and on a daily basis, we have been documenting gross violations of human rights of the sort perpetrated by Lubanga against the people of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.” She said that the Lubanga verdict represented the coming of age of the court and that it sent “a strong signal against impunity for such grave breaches of international law that will reverberate well beyond the D.R.C.”
The United Nations estimates that tens of thousands of boys and girls, some only 8 years old, are involved in numerous conflicts in Africa, Latin America and Asia. Roméo Dallaire, the former Canadian general who commanded the outnumbered United Nations force in Rwanda during the genocide, turned his focus afterward to halting the use of child soldiers. Now a Canadian senator, he said recently that more than 250,000 children, about 40 percent of them girls, are used as messengers, bodyguards, soldiers or sex slaves in conflicts in more than 30 countries.
Some lawyers believe that the ruling dealing with the gravity of sending children into war could help change legal attitudes, if not practices, worldwide. In recent years, other international courts, including those that tried war crimes in Sierra Leone and Rwanda, have addressed similar crimes. But the International Criminal Court, an independent institution now joined by 120 nations, with its broad mandate and scope, carries a particular weight. Still, in Congo, there was some skepticism that the ruling would be able to stop militias from recruiting children. “Over the last 20 years, various militia have conscripted children,” said Aloys Tegera of the Pole Institute, a research group based in the eastern Congolese city of Goma. “Any new militia born will do exactly the same.” He called it a “hope” that the Lubanga verdict would “become a deterrent for warlordism still rampant in the Kivus,” referring to ravaged provinces in the east, and that the court’s critics regard it as a “political instrument.” Even supporters of the court have been ambivalent or critical about the prosecution’s handling of the case. Intense confrontations between prosecutors and judges took place in court as the two sides sought to control the trial. Several times the case came close to imploding.
On two occasions, Mr. Fulford, an experienced British judge, called a halt to the proceedings and ordered Mr. Lubanga released. He said the prosecution’s errors in dealing with evidence and its refusal to follow orders from the bench were making a fair trial impossible. Both times, appeals judges ordered the trial resumed and the errors corrected. Defense lawyers produced evidence that several witnesses, presented as former child soldiers, had given evidence that had been fabricated with the help of researchers for the prosecution
International treaties that prohibit recruiting children have set the age of conscription or other involvement in hostilities at 18, three years older than the limit used by the judges at the court in The Hague. Some activists hope that drafters of future peace treaties will be prompted to recognize the special plight of underage soldiers, perhaps making provisions to start the difficult process to help them rejoin civilian society. Several programs are already under way in Africa. Social workers say that even if children have enlisted willingly, looking for food, status or protection, they are often still damaged by war-time violence and drugs.
Source: New York Times
The decision, which came after a halting, arduous three-year trial, firmly establishes as an international crime the use of children in war — a practice that still enslaves tens of thousands of the young. The ruling adds to the rush of attention to another suspect wanted by the court, Joseph Kony, the leader of the dwindling Lord’s Resistance Army, which for years turned abducted children into soldiers as it marauded through at least four central African countries. But it also underscores some of the failings and limits of the prosecution’s approach. The rebels under Mr. Lubanga’s command were known to have pillaged, raped and killed many civilians in enemy villages, but prosecutors said when he was handed to The Hague in 2006 that the best evidence they had was about child recruiting. The judges strongly reprimanded the prosecution on Wednesday, saying it had been negligent and had delegated investigations to unreliable paid go-betweens who had encouraged witnesses to give false testimony. Two of the three judges wrote dissenting opinions, which were not immediately released.
In a packed courtroom, Mr. Lubanga, 51, dressed in an elegant white ceremonial robe, looked down as the presiding judge, Adrian Fulford of Britain, said that the evidence had confirmed that he and fellow fighters had enlisted boys and girls, sometimes by force; put them through harsh training; punished them; deployed them in fighting; and subjected girls to sexual violence. Mr. Lubanga, who held a degree in psychology and once worked as a teacher and trader, went on to lead a rebel group in the Ituri region, where the local press reported that he asked every family to contribute a cow, money or a child to his militia. He told the court that he was only the political leader of the Union of Congolese Patriots and had discouraged deploying children. But the judges found that in 2002 and 2003, during a brutal ethnic conflict in the northeast of Congo, Mr. Lubanga also led his group’s military wing, provided weapons, ammunition, food and uniforms and made speeches in the Ituri region “encouraging children to join the army.” Videos presented in court showed Mr. Lubanga in training camps in the presence of uniformed children. Although the conflict in Ituri, fueled by rivalries for power and control over mineral riches, dated to the 1990s, the court’s jurisdiction only went into effect in 2002.
In the coming weeks, the court is expected to issue its sentence of Mr. Lubanga and hold hearings on reparations for his victims. He has 30 days to appeal the court’s verdict. The verdict was welcomed by human rights groups.
Navi Pillay, the South African who is the United Nations human rights commissioner, said that “for many years, and on a daily basis, we have been documenting gross violations of human rights of the sort perpetrated by Lubanga against the people of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.” She said that the Lubanga verdict represented the coming of age of the court and that it sent “a strong signal against impunity for such grave breaches of international law that will reverberate well beyond the D.R.C.”
The United Nations estimates that tens of thousands of boys and girls, some only 8 years old, are involved in numerous conflicts in Africa, Latin America and Asia. Roméo Dallaire, the former Canadian general who commanded the outnumbered United Nations force in Rwanda during the genocide, turned his focus afterward to halting the use of child soldiers. Now a Canadian senator, he said recently that more than 250,000 children, about 40 percent of them girls, are used as messengers, bodyguards, soldiers or sex slaves in conflicts in more than 30 countries.
Some lawyers believe that the ruling dealing with the gravity of sending children into war could help change legal attitudes, if not practices, worldwide. In recent years, other international courts, including those that tried war crimes in Sierra Leone and Rwanda, have addressed similar crimes. But the International Criminal Court, an independent institution now joined by 120 nations, with its broad mandate and scope, carries a particular weight. Still, in Congo, there was some skepticism that the ruling would be able to stop militias from recruiting children. “Over the last 20 years, various militia have conscripted children,” said Aloys Tegera of the Pole Institute, a research group based in the eastern Congolese city of Goma. “Any new militia born will do exactly the same.” He called it a “hope” that the Lubanga verdict would “become a deterrent for warlordism still rampant in the Kivus,” referring to ravaged provinces in the east, and that the court’s critics regard it as a “political instrument.” Even supporters of the court have been ambivalent or critical about the prosecution’s handling of the case. Intense confrontations between prosecutors and judges took place in court as the two sides sought to control the trial. Several times the case came close to imploding.
On two occasions, Mr. Fulford, an experienced British judge, called a halt to the proceedings and ordered Mr. Lubanga released. He said the prosecution’s errors in dealing with evidence and its refusal to follow orders from the bench were making a fair trial impossible. Both times, appeals judges ordered the trial resumed and the errors corrected. Defense lawyers produced evidence that several witnesses, presented as former child soldiers, had given evidence that had been fabricated with the help of researchers for the prosecution
International treaties that prohibit recruiting children have set the age of conscription or other involvement in hostilities at 18, three years older than the limit used by the judges at the court in The Hague. Some activists hope that drafters of future peace treaties will be prompted to recognize the special plight of underage soldiers, perhaps making provisions to start the difficult process to help them rejoin civilian society. Several programs are already under way in Africa. Social workers say that even if children have enlisted willingly, looking for food, status or protection, they are often still damaged by war-time violence and drugs.
Source: New York Times
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)