The
Rejection of Africom
It
was not much of a surprise to learn from the BBC that African countries have
rejected Africoms presence in Africa. Africans
may not need Africom. While Africom’s vision may seem noble, it has failed to
honestly address serious African security issues. One of its biggest failure stems
from Americas foreign policy prescription or logic that declares, “Your terrorist
is not my terrorist.” While there is an agreement in the definition of a
terrorist, they claim that the only terrorist America is concerned are those
with international reach, in other words those who threaten our interest.
It
appears that Africom was asking African governments to open their doors so it
can cleverly and selectively chase terror groups that are treats to American
interests. This attitude was so obvious particularly in the Horn of Africa.
Case in point, the killings of 77 civilian Chinese and Ethiopian oil workers by
ONLF, a group that is considered to be a terrorist entity by the Ethiopian
government. A group financed internationally, including by the government of
Libya. Ethiopia’s effort to get justice for these senseless killings has been
dubbed as human rights violations by the American congress. Even worse,
Ethiopia is threatened with sanctions by the American congress. This by the way
is what your terrorists are not my terrorist means. However, regional terrorist
financers and sanctuaries like Eritrea and Libya are ignored or even cuddled.
This fragmented American policy has a negative implications for the
whole region, much like the Ethiopian case, Chad, Sudan and Somalia are affected by failures to address the
real regional culprits, such as Libya who has been reported by the UN Security
Council as the financers of
the radical Islamist insurgency attacking the Somali government in Mogadishu;
is also playing a destructive role in Sudan and Chad by arming destructive
groups and providing training through its surrogate countries like Eritrea.
American policy makers have chosen to give the blind eye to Libya’s Oil cash that
play this dirty game again and again everywhere in north, central and eastern
Africa. The View from Africa is that, this is done in the interest of mending good relations with Libya on behalf of
American oil companies. In view of this, African governments are sending a
message by rejecting the Africom initiatives. Libya on the other hand, is
rejecting Africom because Africom could go against Gaddafi’s dream of becoming
the African king maker and his United State of Africa fantasy. Most Africans
though cannot see how Africa’s interests are addressed with such American
attitudes.
African analysts
have also asserted that Africoms interest has a lot to do with the emerging
Chinese presence and its importance in Africa’s economic development. But the
west and some critics contend that China is a neocolonial power that is using Africa as a
source of raw materials, especially petroleum. But the same could be said for
the United States and Europe. Some U.S. officials believe that China’s efforts to control energy sources
in Africa and elsewhere could exclude U.S. oil companies and undermine U.S.
foreign policy. What Africans are saying however is, China needs Africa and
Africa needs China?
According to China’s Africa policy, China and African countries will
continue to sympathize with each other to enhance long-term friendly political
ties and support each another for the establishment of a fair and reasonable
new economic cooperation. China is undeniably making big contribution to
African economic growth; it has invested billions of dollars in infrastructure,
and has provided finance for other critical economic sectors in Africa. On the
other hand, the west has refused to open its markets and is seen as attempting
to scuttle Africa’s development by directly or indirectly through its
surrogates chocking the flow of capital for critically needed infrastructures.
Very good examples of these pretentious relationships with the west are the
recent attempts to stop Uganda, Botswana, and Ethiopia from building Dams that
are critical for their developments. The patronizing attitude on this from the
west is, ‘it is environmentally damaging and that Africa does not need
hospitals and schools with electric city’.
Finally, the
voice from Africa is saying enough of these pretentious and patronizing
relations. If my terrorist is not your terrorist and if our hospitals and
schools without electric city are not your concerns, then we have little in
common for a cooperative relationship. It is the culmination of all this and
more that led to the rejection of Africom and there by American policy on
Africa.