Intergovernmental Authority for Development(IGAD)IGAD is bragging to be the premier regional organization for achieving peace, prosperity and regional integration in the in the Horn of Africa . However, since its creation in 1996 the regions as gone major wars, military interventions, chronic conflict, starvation, regional division than integration. Since its creation has been manipulated by Meles Zenawie for his power and regional position to re-enforce his international and African Status and cover up his internal misconduct, ethnic cleansing and genocide.
The seven member states of IGAD – Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda – cover an area of 5.2 Million sq. km and have a population of more than 200 Million. The average population growth rate of 2.6 % is one of the highest in the world and nearly half of the population is under 14 years of age.
This uncessful orgnaization took its root in 1983 and 1984, ( Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda) established an intergovernmental body for development and drought control in their region(IGADD). Eritrea became the seventh member after attaining independence in 1993 and suspended its membership from the organization April 21, 2007 after a rift with arch-foe Ethiopia at a meeting on Somalia this month threatened to divide the region. The reason given by the Eritrea:-
“It’s a temporary withdrawal. We feel that it’s not responsible to stay in that organisation when decisions are being made that are not legally or morally acceptable.” “The organisation is being manipulated by external forces, a number of repeated and irresponsible resolutions that undermine regional peace and security have been adopted in the guise of IGAD.”
The festering feud between Ethiopia and Eritrea, still bitter over their 1998-2000 border war and locked in what many see as a proxy war in Somalia.
Area (Sq. Km)
Annual Population Growth(%)
GNI per capita (US$)
The non realized objectives of IGAD were:-
Promote joint development strategies and gradually harmonize macro-economic policies and programmes in the social, technological and scientific fields;
Harmonize policies with regard to trade, customs, transport, communications, agriculture, and natural resources, and promote free movement of goods, services, and people within the region.
Create an enabling environment for foreign, cross-border and domestic trade and investment;
Achieve regional food security and encourage and assist efforts of Member States to collectively combat drought and other natural and man-made disatsters and their natural consequences;
Initiate and promote programmes and projects to achieve regional food security and sustainable development of natural resources and environment protection, and encourage and assist efforts of Member States to collectively combat drought and other natural and man-made disasters and their consequences;
Develop and improve a coordinated and complementary infrastructure, in the areas of transport, telecommunications and energy in the region;
Promote peace and stability in the region and create mechanisms within the region for the prevention, management and resolution of inter-State and intra-State conflicts through dialogue;
Mobilize resources for the implementation of emergency, short-term, medium-term and long-term programmes within the framework of regional cooperation;
Promote and realize the objectives of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and the African Economic Community;
Facilitate, promote and strengthen cooperation in research development and application in science and technology
Communique of the 15th Extraordinary Session of the IGAD Assembly of Heads of State
Having taken note of the decisions and recommendations made by the 36th Extra-ordinary Session of the IGAD Council of Ministers as reflected in their Communiqué of 15th June 2010,
Having taken note of the report of the IGAD military expert’s mission to Mogadishu,
Considering the brief by the President of the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia and his appeal for urgent support and assistance to build the capacity of the TFG security forces,
Recalling the previous decisions of the IGAD Assembly of Heads of State and Government and the Council of Ministers on Somalia,
1. Notes with serious concern the deteriorating security situation in Somalia which poses serious threat to the peace, security and stability to the people and TFG of Somalia , the region and the international community ;
2. Reiterates the commitment and resolve of IGAD member states to give unswerving support and assistance to the TFG in its struggle against extremist and terrorist groups;
3. Underlines that the conflict in Somalia is not a conflict among the Somalis but between the people of Somalia and international terrorist groups;
4. Emphasizes the need for an urgent and robust response by international community led by the UN Security Council, to arrest the escalating danger facing Somalia and the sub-Region and reiterates its previous call to the UN to convert AMISOM into a UN peace keeping operation without delay;
5. Decides that a sustainable and reliable funding mechanism to be established and managed jointly by AMISOM, UNPOS, IGAD and the TFG for sustainment of the security forces upon development and deployment in Somalia;
6. Calls upon the African Union to relocate as soon as possible the civilian and police components of AMISOM to Mogadishu;
7. Regrets that the approved level of AMISOM troops has not been achieved thus far; and decides to deploy 2000 peacekeepers under AMISOM to Somalia immediately; and further calls upon the AU Commission to mobilize the necessary resources, logistics and equipment for the deployment;
8. Decides to work with all parties including AMISOM and UN Security Council to raise 20,000 troops to be deployed throughout the country. In this regard, Summit Embraces the need to mobilize Somali forces internally with possible intervention by neighboring countries including approaching the East African Community (EAC) and empower them with resources and equipment;
9. Endorses the recommendations of the military mission to Somalia as amended; Directs the Chiefs of Defense Staff of IGAD Member States to convene an urgent meeting and submit to the AU Commission an action plan to deploy 2000 peace keepers to Somalia to enable AMISOM to reach the authorized strength of 8100, and to review and implement, as appropriate, the recommendations made by the IGAD Military Mission to Somalia;
10. Directs the Chairperson of the Council of Ministers and IGAD Secretariat to make the necessary arrangement for the convening of the meeting of the IGAD chiefs of defense staff;
11. Decides to render support to the TFG Security institutions by providing inter alia training of troops and trainers , establishment of joint command and providing experts;
12. Directs IGAD Secretariat to strengthen its office in Mogadishu within 15 days and Calls upon AMISOM, UNPOS and IGAD to establish in Mogadishu an operational level coordination mechanism to strengthen and harmonize their support to the TFG in the areas of training, establishment of command and control structure;
13. Express appreciation to the partner Countries and organizations that are currently providing financial, material and technical assistance to the TFG andCalls upon them to enhance and sustain their support;
14. Welcomes the Agreement signed between the TFG and Ahlu Sunna Wal Jamma’a on 15 March 2010 in Addis Ababa and encourages the parties to realize the full implementation of the Agreement;
15. Encouraged by the commitment of the leadership of the TFG and urgesTransitional Federal Institutions (TFIs) to enhance their cohesion and unity in the face of the enormous challenges that Somalia is facing currently and in order to make progress in the accomplishment of the numerous tasks envisaged for the transitional period;
16. Calls upon the Chairperson of AUC to appoint an eminent person to lead the campaign for peace in Somalia. The eminent person shall be at the apex of a coordinating mechanism towards reconstitution and building the State of Somalia and to raise the profile of the country internationally;
17. Calls upon the international community to continue assisting refugees, internally displaced persons and victims of violence.
18. Affirms that the Djibouti process remains the sole basis for the Somalia peace and reconciliation and Rejects the proliferation of initiatives inimical to the swift resolution of the crisis in Somalia; Urges the TFG to continue the efforts it has been making to broaden its base while ensuring that the process is protected from the threat posed by extremists whose major effort includes the dismantling of the Djibouti process;
19. Calls upon AU Member states that have not contributed troops to render financial and material support to Somalia;
20. Having listened to a brief by H.E. Ismael Omar Guelleh, the President of the Republic of Djibouti on the mediation efforts by Qatar between Djibouti and Eritrea, decides to encourage the positive developments and also underscore the necessity for Eritrea to carry out all its obligations under the UN Security Council Resolution 1907 (2009).
21. Decides to remain seized of the matter.
Issued this 5th day of July, 2010, in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Mo Ibrahim rejected the African leaders for second year worthy of any prize, 2009 & 2010. It easier to make himself Laureate than to find one from the African Dinosaurs. He was awarded the European Mercator Fund’s Raymond Georis Prize for Innovative Philanthropy, at the closing plenary of 21st EFC Annual General Assembly and Conference on 4 June 2010.
“Whether there is a winner or not, the purpose of the Foundation is to challenge those in Africa and across the world to debate what constitutes excellence in leadership.” (Mo)
Mo understood the true nature of African leadership and their Banana Republics. May 2010, the African leaders acclamed the worst dictator Melese Zenawie has claimed winning an election with a shameful sliding victory of 99.6%. These African leaders do not deserve any kind of prize but that of non governeace and treachery, if there is one. The African leaders are not even ashmed to see the froud commited flagrantely in the capital of African Unity Addis Ababa , rather prefer to endorse such a sham election.
“The Board respects the decision of the Prize Committee not to select a winner for the 2010 prize. The Prize Committee, which is independent from the Board, is a unique repository of experience and expertise.”
Melese Zenawie of Ethiopia and Beshir of Sudan lost the the occasion to win the prize and prefer the power seat . It seems Mo is trying in vain to persuade the african dictators to let the power go without success.
Melee & Beshir merit ike their model Charles Taylor to visit the ICC than to be awarded any kind of Prize or lulled to leave power by Mo’s soft methodology.
Mo would have found a lot of candidate if his foundation change its role and start giving prize for the African dictators longevity in powers. Meles and Mo’s compatriot Beshir would have been the first to win, that ” would have opened” Mo many doors around the continent’s corrupted regimes.
Mo Ibrahim African leadership prize withheld again
BBC 14 June 2010
The world’s most valuable individual prize is not being awarded for a second year because no-one is deemed worthy of winning it.
Sudanese businessman Mo Ibrahim set up the $5m (£3m) prize for African ex-leaders to encourage good governance on the continent.
“The standards set for the prize-winner are high,” he said, adding that no new candidates had emerged since last year.
Winners must have been democratically elected and agreed to leave office.
South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki, Nigeria’s Olusegun Obasanjo and Ghana’s John Kufuor are among those who qualified for last year’s prize after stepping down in the previous three years.
“It is likely that there will be years when no prize is awarded. In the current year, no new candidates emerged,” said a statement from the Mo Ibrahim Foundation.
The winners receive $5m over 10 years, and then $200,000 a year for life.
Mr Ibrahim argues that the prize is needed because many leaders of sub-Saharan African countries come from poor backgrounds and are tempted to hang on to power for fear that poverty is what awaits them when they give up the levers of power.
Botswana’s former President Festus Mogae won the prize in 2008 after two terms at the helm of one of Africa’s least corrupt and most prosperous nations.
The inaugural prize was given to Joaquim Chissano, Mozambique’s former president, who has since acted as a mediator in several
The US is forced to put its new Africa Command in Germany for now,only Liberia, offered to host it.
Most African countries are scared considering it as a new colonization of the US by militarization the continent, since it has been only half a century they came out of brutal colonization.
The us military command was created to unite responsibilities shared by three other US regional commands.
According to the US the key aim of Africom was to build the capacity of African countries for security and peacekeeping. theAfricans doubt the US intentions as they felt a lose of the hard won national sovereignty.
Gen William Ward Head of Africom
“I believe that the U.S. military can be an effective long-term partner in Africa, because we share the same goal of an Africa that is secure, stable and developed in ways meaningful to its people and our global society. Our men and women in uniform bring capabilities to help the Africans achieve their security goals while demonstrating how pride in ones service can make a difference in how the people of a nation feel towards their military, their government, and each other especially in places where ethnic tensions remain a factor.”
General Kip Ward , Commander, United States Africa Command
U.S. Civil Affairs Assist Pemba with VETCAP U.S. Navy Maritime Civil Affairs team 202 worked side-by-side with the 353rd Functional Specialty (FxSp) Team and Pemba livestock officers to vaccinate and treat more than 4,000 animals during a veterinary civic action project (VETCAP) on Pemba Island, Tanzania. May 3-14, 2010. All animals were given…
As the US Africa Command (AFRICOM) force becomes ever more active in Somalia, questions must be raised as to the intentions of this militarised organisation, writes Explo Nani-Kofi. Nani-Kofi stresses that the African continent grows ever more vulnerable to a maturing breed of neocolonial occupation based on US-led proxy wars.
When Barack Obama was elected president of the US, it was supposed to be the end of the bad old days of George W. Bush. But in Somalia, the ‘war on terror’ continues.
March this year saw the start of a new US operation in support of the transitional government in Somalia.
According to the New York Times, American advisors had spent the last several months training Somali forces to be deployed in the offensive against factions of the Union of Islamic Courts movement, and the US had provided ‘covert training to Somali intelligence officers, logistical support to the peacekeepers, fuel for the maneuvers, surveillance information about insurgent positions and money for bullets and guns’.
This was something of a covert operation from the US point of view. A US official, who told the paper ‘what you’re likely to see is air strikes and Special Ops moving in, hitting and getting out’, said he was not allowed to speak publicly about it.
The Somali government, however, was happy to boast of US involvement. General Mohamed Gelle Kahiye, the new chief of staff of the armed forces, said of a military surveillance plane overhead, ‘It’s the Americans. They’re helping us.’
On 2 May, explosions in a mosque in Mogadishu’s Bakara market, a stronghold of the US-targeted Al Shabaab group, killed 45 people and triggered fighting between a pro-government militia and Al Shabaab and Hizbal al Islam, both factions of the Union of Islamic Courts movement. It’s not clear who actually set off the explosions, but it is beginning to seem that Somalia could be the US Africa Command’s (AFRICOM) first overt war.
The Obama administration’s 2011 budget request for security assistance programmes in Africa includes $38 million for arms sales to African states, $21 million for training African officers and $24 million for anti-terrorism programmes. This is in addition to the 40 tonnes of arms and ammunition supplied to the Somali transitional government in 2009, and military aid to Ethiopia, which fronted for the US in the fight against the Union of Islamic Courts in 2006. AFRICOM has now taken over US security assistance programmes with Mali, Niger, Chad and Senegal, and the Defense Department is now considering forming a 1,000-strong marine rapid deployment force for Africa. Although AFRICOM gives the impression it is not a combat force, it looks as if this may change.
The justification for US involvement in Somalia is ‘Islamic extremism’. Al Shabaab is on the US list of terrorist organisations as a supposed part of al-Qaeda. On 14 March, General William (‘Kip’) Ward, commander of AFRICOM, singled out Somalia in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee as the east African country most ‘threatened by terrorists’, while Senator Carl Levin stated that ‘al Qaeda and violent extremists who share their ideology are not just located in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region but in places like Somalia, Mali, Nigeria and Niger’. Kip Ward also spoke of support for the Somali government, which is being fought against by radical Islamist groups, as a responsibility that the US has to take up. This means that there is no separation between the US–UK presence in Afghanistan and AFRICOM’s operations in Somalia and other parts of Africa.
Writing in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on 10 March, the last ambassador of the United States to Somalia (1994–95), Daniel H. Simpson, posed the question ‘Why, apart from the only lightly documented charge of Islamic extremism among the Shabaab, is the United States reengaging in Somalia at this time?’ He provided the answer himself: ‘Part of the reason is because the United States has its only base in Africa up the coast from Mogadishu, in Djibouti, the former French Somaliland. The US Africa Command was established there in 2008, and, absent the willingness of other African countries to host it, the base in Djibouti became the headquarters for US troops and fighter bombers in Africa.’
AFRICOM, responsible for US military operations for the whole of the African continent except Egypt, was established in October 2008, but the idea goes back to the beginning of the decade, when the US National Intelligence Council estimated that the US will buy 25 per cent of its oil from Africa by 2015. Oil and natural gas seems to always sit nicely with this so-called war on terror.
The case of Somalia epitomises the proxy war situation in Africa and also smashes some of the myths around why African countries are in the situation they are. It’s sometimes argued that the different languages and tribes in many African countries are the cause of their problems. However, Somalia is one country with one language and one dominant religion, so by that reasoning it should have more internal harmony than its neighbours. The explanation for its problems lies in the history of colonialism and exploitation by Western powers. The breakdown of national cohesion in Somalia and the civil war in 1988, since when the country has been ungovernable from Mogadishu, was caused by its use in the Cold War and specifically by President Siad Barre’s decision to seek alliances with the US and apartheid South Africa against Soviet Union-backed Ethiopia. Subsequent international interventions, like the UN force in 1992 and the Ethiopian US-backed invasion in 2006 have been more about occupation than mediation.
The US proxy war in Africa is a mechanism to re-colonise the continent and extend the boundaries of the war on terror. It’s time to mobilise against it. To support the campaign against AFRICOM and the proxy situation in Africa, check the Sons and daughters of Africa Movement Facebook page, coordinated in Europe by Agnes Munyi-Vanselow and Explo Nani-Kofi of KILOMBO – Campaigning Against Proxy War Situation in Africa and AFRICOM. The latter is affiliated with the Stop the War Coalition in the UK.
AFRICOM’s First War: U.S. Directs Large-Scale Offensive In Somalia
By Rick Rozoff
Wednesday, Mar 17, 2010
“The United States Africa Command, also known as AFRICOM, is a new U.S. military headquarters devoted only to Africa. It is one of the U.S. Defense Department’s six regional headquarters. Command officials will work with African partners to achieve a more stable environment in which political and economic growth can take place.”(Text & photo – U.S. Department of Defense website)
Over 43 people have been killed in the Somali capital of Mogadishu in the past two days in fighting between Shabab (al-Shabaab) insurgent forces, who on March 10 advanced to within one mile of the nation’s presidential palace, and troops of the U.S.-backed Transitional Federal Government. The fighting has just begun.
The last ambassador of the United States to Somalia (1994-1995), Daniel H. Simpson, penned a column for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on March 10 in which which he posed the question “why, apart from the only lightly documented charge of Islamic extremism among the Shabab, is the United States reengaging in Somalia at this time?”
He answered it in stating “Part of the reason is because the United States has its only base in Africa up the coast from Mogadishu, in Djibouti, the former French Somaliland. The U.S. Africa Command was established there in 2008, and, absent the willingness of other African countries to host it, the base in Djibouti became the headquarters for U.S. troops and fighter bombers in Africa.
“Flush with money, in spite of the expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Department of Defense obviously feels itself in a position to undertake military action in Africa, in Somalia.”1
Fulfilling its appointed role, the New York Times leaked U.S. military plans for the current offensive in Somalia on March 5 in a report titled “U.S. Aiding Somalia in Its Plan to Retake Its Capital.” (Note that the Transitional Federal Government is presented as Somalia itself and Mogadishu as its capital.)
The tone of the feature was of course one of approval and endorsement of the Pentagon’s rationale for directly intervening in Somalia at a level not seen since 1993 and support for proxy actions last witnessed with the invasion by Ethiopia in 2006. The report began with a description of a military surveillance plane circling over the Somali capital and a quote from the new chief of staff of the nation’s armed forces, General Mohamed Gelle Kahiye: “It’s the Americans. They’re helping us.”
Afterward “An American official in Washington, who said he was not authorized to speak publicly” – a hallmark of the American free press – was, if not identified, quoted as maintaining that U.S. covert operations were planned if not already underway and “What you’re likely to see is airstrikes and Special Ops moving in, hitting and getting out.”2
The New York Times also provided background information regarding the current offensive:
“Over the past several months, American advisers have helped supervise the training of the Somali forces to be deployed in the offensive….The Americans have provided covert training to Somali intelligence officers, logistical support to the peacekeepers, fuel for the maneuvers, surveillance information about insurgent positions and money for bullets and guns.”3
Four days later General William (“Kip”) Ward, commander of United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
In his introductory remarks the chairman of the committee, Senator Carl Levin, reinforced recent American attempts to expand the scope of the deepening Afghanistan-Pakistan war, the deadliest and lengthiest in the world, to the west and south in stating that “al Qaeda and violent extremists who share their ideology are not just located in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region but in places like Somalia, Mali, Nigeria and Niger.”4
In his formal report Ward pursued a similar tact and expanded the Pentagon’s “counter-terrorism” (CT) area of responsibility yet further from South Asia: “U.S. Africa Command has focused the majority of its CT capacity building activities in East Africa on Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, and Uganda, which – aside from Somalia – are the countries directly threatened by terrorists.”5
He also spoke of the current offensive by “the transition government to reclaim parts of Mogadishu,” stating “I think it’s something that we would look to do and support.”6
Senator Levin and General Ward included eight African nations in the broader Afghan war category of Operation Enduring Freedom, countries from the far northeast of the continent (the Horn of Africa) to the far west (the oil-rich Gulf of Guinea). The U.S. military has already been involved in counterinsurgency operations in Mali and Niger against ethnic Tuareg rebels, who have no conceivable ties to al-Qaeda, not that one would know that from Levin’s comments.
“In an exercise last month near Bamako, Mali, American troops helped soldiers from Mali and Senegal in West Africa learn to guard their borders against infiltration by Islamic militants.” (The New York Times, December 12, 2008.)
In between South Asia and Africa lies Yemen on the Arabian Peninsula. The New York Times report cited earlier reminded readers that “The United States is increasingly concerned about the link between Somalia and Yemen.” Indeed as Levin’s comments quoted above establish, Washington (along with its NATO allies) is forging an expanded war front from Afghanistan and Pakistan to Yemen and into Africa.7
That extension of the South Asia war has not gone unobserved in world capitals, and earlier this year Russian political analyst Andrei Fedyashin commented: “Adding up all four fronts – if the United States ventured an attack on Yemen and Somalia – America would have to invade a territory equal to three-fourths of Western Europe; and it is hardly strong enough for that.”8
Strong enough or not, that is just what the White House and the Pentagon are doing. The only other objection that can be raised to the above author’s description is that it too severely narrows the intended battlefront.
In the past six months Somali troops have been sent to Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda for combat training and “most are now back in the capital, waiting to fight.”
In addition, “There are also about 5,000 Ugandan and Burundian peacekeepers, with 1,700 more on their way, and they are expected to play a vital role in backing up advancing Somali forces.”9
Last October the U.S. led ten days of military exercises in Uganda – Natural Fire 10 – with 450 American troops and over 550 from Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. The U.S. soldiers were deployed from Camp Lemonier (Lemonnier) in Djibouti, home to the Pentagon’s Joint Task Force/Horn of Africa and over 2,000 U.S. forces. The de facto headquarters of AFRICOM.
At the time of the maneuvers a major Ugandan newspaper wrote that they were “geared towards the formation of the first Joint East African Military Force.”10
In addition to using such a multinational regional force in Somalia, the U.S. can also deploy it against Uganda’s Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) rebels in Uganda, Congo and Sudan, and could even employ it against Eritrea, Zimbabwe and Sudan, along with Somalia the only nations on the African continent not to some degree enmeshed in military partnerships with Washington and NATO. (Libya has participated in NATO naval exercises and South Africa has hosted the bloc’s warships.)11
Earlier this month the Kenyan newspaper The East African divulged that “American legislators are pushing for a law that will see another phase of military action to apprehend Lord’s Resistance Army rebels.”
The news source added that the LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Bill adopted by the U.S. Congress last year “requires the US government to develop a new multifaceted strategy” and as such the new bill under consideration “will not be the first time the US government is providing support to the Uganda army in fighting the LRA.
“The US has been backing the UPDF [Uganda People’s Defence Force] with logistics and training to fight the rebel group.”12
Last month it was announced that the U.S. Africa Command has dispatched special forces to train 1,000 Congolese troops in the north and east of their nation, where Congo borders Uganda.
Former U.S. diplomat Daniel Simpson was quoted above as to what in part is Washington’s motive in pursuing a new war in and around Somalia: To test out AFRICOM ground and air forces in Djibouti for direct military action on the continent.
A United Press International report of March 10, placed under energy news, offered another explanation. In a feature titled “East Africa is next hot oil zone,” the news agency disclosed that “East Africa is emerging as the next oil boom following a big strike in Uganda’s Lake Albert Basin. Other oil and natural gas reserves have been found in Tanzania and Mozambique and exploration is under way in Ethiopia and even war-torn Somalia.”
Emerging energy interests in Uganda’s Lake Albert Basin.
The region is, in the words of the Western chief executive officer of an oil prospecting firm, “the last real high-potential area in the world that hasn’t been fully explored.”13
The article added:
“The discovery at Lake Albert, in the center of Africa between Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, is estimated to contain the equivalent of several billion barrels of oil. It is likely to be the biggest onshore field found south of the Sahara Desert in two decades.”
It also spoke of “a vast 135,000-square-mile territory in landlocked Ethiopia that is believed to contain sizable reserves of oil. It is estimated to hold 4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas as well.”
And, more pertinent to the Horn of Africa:
“A 1993 study by Petroconsultants of Geneva concluded that Somalia has two of the most potentially interesting hydrocarbon-yielding basins in the entire region – one in the central Mudugh region, the other in the Gulf of Aden. More recent analyses indicate that Somalia could have reserves of up to 10 billion barrels.”10
Washington’s North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies are also deeply involved in the militarization of East Africa.
On March 10 NATO extended its naval operation in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia, Ocean Shield, to the end of 2012, an unprecedentedly long 33-month extension. On March 12 “Standing NATO Maritime Group 2 will take over missions from Standing NATO Maritime Group 1 for the four-month assignment. The change will increase NATO’s contribution from four ships to five ships….”15
At the same hearings of the Senate Armed Services Committee that AFRICOM commander William Ward addressed, NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, America’s Admiral James Stavridis, “noted that 100,000 NATO troops are involved in expeditionary operations on three continents, including operations in Afghanistan, off the coast of Africa, and in Bosnia.” (Evidently Kosovo was meant for Bosnia.)
Stavridis, who is concurrently top military chief of U.S. European Command, said “The nature of threats in this 21st century [is] going to demand more than just sitting behind our borders.”16
He also said he finds “Iran alarming in any number of dimensions,” specifically mentioning alleged “state-sponsored terrorism, nuclear proliferation and political outreach into Latin America.”17
NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen recently returned from Jordan and the Persian Gulf state of Bahrain where he pressured both nations to support the war in Afghanistan and Alliance naval operations.
“NATO’s top official said [on March 9] that he has asked Jordan and Bahrain to contribute to alliance naval operations fighting terrorism and piracy in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Gulf of Aden, as he ended a visit to the two countries. NATO is keen to improve cooperation with Arab and Muslim states, seeing them as important allies for a number of missions, including the all-important deployment in Afghanistan.”18
Regarding the Western military bloc’s almost nine-year Operation Active Endeavor in the entire Mediterranean Sea and its Operation Ocean Shield in the Gulf of Aden, Rasmussen said, “We would very much like to strengthen cooperation (with Bahrain and Jordan) within these operations.”19
While in Jordan he was strengthening military ties with NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue partnership – Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia – and in Bahrain firming up the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative aimed at the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates have military personnel serving under NATO in Afghanistan.
In late February a delegation of the 53-nation African Union (AU) visited NATO’s Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe in Mons, Belgium.
“NATO continues to support the AU mission in Somalia (AMISOM) through the provision of strategic sea- and air-lift for AMISOM Troop Contributing Nations on request. The last airlift support occurred in June 2008 when NATO transported a battalion of Burundian peacekeepers to Mogadishu.”21
On March 10 AMISON deployed tanks to prevent the capture of the Somali presidential palace by rebels.
The North Atlantic military bloc, which in recent years has conducted large-scale exercises in West Africa and inaugurated its international Response Force in Cape Verde in 2006, also supports “the operationalisation of the African Standby Force – the African Union’s vision for a continental, on-call security apparatus similar to the NATO Response Force.”22
In May the European Union, whose membership largely overlaps with that of NATO and which is engaged in intense integration with the military bloc on a global scale22 will begin training 2,000 Somali troops in Uganda.
Brigadier General Thierry Caspar-Fille-Lambie, commanding officer of French armed forces in Djibouti, said “the Somali troops will be trained with the necessary military skills to help pacify and stabilize the volatile country.”
He issued that statement “at the closing ceremony of four-week French operational training of 1,700 Ugandan troops to be deployed” to Somalia in May. The French ambassador to Uganda said “The EU troops shall work in close collaboration with UPDF to train Somali troops.”23
The 2,000 soldiers to be trained by the EU will represent a full third of a projected 6,000-troop Somali army.
The U.S.-NATO-EU global triad plans an even larger collective military role in the new scramble for Africa. On March 4 and 5 a delegation from AFRICOM met with European Union officials in Brussels “seeking EU cooperation in Africa,” specifically in “areas where cooperation could be possible, notably with the soon-to-be-launched EU mission to train Somali troops.”24
Tony Holmes, AFRICOM’s deputy to the commander for civil-military activities, said “Somalia, that’s an area where we’re going to be doing a lot more, the European Union is already doing a lot and will be doing more….
“Somalia is very important for us. The European Union is involved in training Somalis in Uganda and that’s something we might be able to work closely with to support.”
The AFRICOM delegation, including Major-General Richard Sherlock, director of strategy, plans and programs, also discussed “counter-terrorism cooperation with the EU in the Sahel region, notably in Mauritania, Mali and Niger….”25
In late January the chairman of NATO’s Military Committee, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola, said “that the Alliance is in discussion with a Gulf state to deploy AWACS planes for a reconnaissance mission over Afghanistan in support of its ISAF mission and also for anti-piracy off Somalia.”26
To demonstrate that NATO’s anti-piracy operation off the coast of Somalia has other designs than the one acknowledged, early this year a NATO spokesman announced that the bloc’s naval contingent in the Gulf of Aden “now has an additional task” to intervene against a fictional deployment of Somali fighters across the Gulf to Yemen.
The spokesman, Jacqui Sheriff, said “NATO warships will be on the lookout for anything suspicious.”27
As though Somali al-Shabaab fighters have nothing else to do as the U.S. is engineering an all-out assault on them in their homeland.
Five days after the New York Times feature detailed American war plans in Somalia, the Washington Times followed up on and added to that report.
U.S. operations are “likely to be the most overt demonstration of U.S. military backing since the ill-fated Operation Restore Hope of 1992….”
“Unmanned U.S. surveillance aircraft have been seen circling over Mogadishu in recent days, apparently pinpointing insurgent positions as the TFG [Transitional Federal Government] marshals its forces. U.S. Army advisers have been helping train the TFG’s forces, which have been largely equipped with millions of dollars’ worth of U.S. arms airlifted into Mogadishu over the last few weeks.”
The newspaper report further stated: “It’s not clear when the offensive will start. The word on the street is sometime in the next few weeks….”
The campaign has already begun.
“After securing Mogadishu, the offensive, supported by militias allied with the government, for now, at least, is likely to continue against al-Shebab in the countryside west and south toward the border with Kenya.”28
The People of Africa Reject AFRICOM – A U.S. Bid for Military Dominance (Updated) ( 0)