How Others See The New Imperialism
Last week, and then again yesterday, I noted the new role our military is assuming. That role is best exemplified by AFRICOM, a program which has received very little press in this country. That lack of coverage, however, appears to be in place only here, as I discovered in this op-ed piece in The Journal of Turkish Weekly. Here's how the Turkish writers view the new program:
Even though the rationale behind the trip was presented as related to the humanitarian issues, the hidden aim of the Bush’s visit to Africa on his last months as the President has been to build up the ‘legitimate’ grounds for the recently initiated project of AFRICOM. In fact, the AFRICOM has been the product of the gradually evolving policy of the US and indicated the increased militarization of the US policies in Africa. [Emphasis added]
Placing US military bases in other countries is certainly not a new phenomenon, but the sudden thrust into Africa, especially sub-Saharan Africa, is. The writers suggest that the perceived US hegemony certainly explains some of the change in policy. In the past, the earlier colonial powers in Europe were expected to secure "western interests" in this region of the world. That is no longer a satsifactory arrangement for a country that sees itself as the only super-power.
Then, the inevitable question of ‘why’ arises to reveal the reasons behind such a considerably important policy shift towards Africa. That is, why has Africa suddenly become an important strategic concern for the US to launch such a grand project of AFRICOM?
Regarding such a crucial question, the Bush administration justifies the project of AFRICOM by arguing that it will “… bring peace and security to the people of Africa and promote our common goals of development, health, education, democracy and economic growth in Africa.” In fact, the rhetoric is the same: to solve the problems with the military force ready to intervene into the internal affairs of any country. However, quite interestingly, Bush on his trip to five African countries never referred to AFRICOM, but instead tried to divert attentions to the US humanitarian assistance to the Black Africa
...Many experts have rightly argued that there are mainly three reasons behind the US project of AFRICOM:
The first and foremost reason behind the establishment of the AFRICOM is related with the security of the ‘US access to African natural resources, especially oil.’ It has been widely argued that the US has increasingly become more and more dependent on the African oil. ...
As a second factor behind the US project of AFRICOM, the current rivalry with China over Africa is on the top agenda of the Bush administration to tackle with. In one way or another, the recently increasing engagement of China in Africa has alarmed Washington with the concerns for the security of the US access to the African oil. ...
The third reason commonly referred to explain the real US ambitions behind the initiation of AFRICOM is simply to make Africa another front for the so called war on terrorism. ... [Emphasis added]
In other words, it's about the oil. Oh, and terra terra terra, which is shorthand for using the boogie man to get what the current administration and its corporate sponsors want. How surprising is that?
Apprently at least some African nations are not buying into this oh-so-generous offer for "humanitarian aid" by the US.
...[A] Majority of the African states have demonstrated crucial doubts about the ‘humanitarian’ aspects of the recent US project, and firmly stood against any deployment of US military basis in African soil. Especially such countries as Nigeria and South Africa have explicitly declared that they would not permit such a policy in their countries.
Smart, them. I'm certain the current administration hadn't considered that part of the equation which states that some countries treasure their national sovereignty too much to be easily bought off by promises to paint schools and such like.
324 days
Even though the rationale behind the trip was presented as related to the humanitarian issues, the hidden aim of the Bush’s visit to Africa on his last months as the President has been to build up the ‘legitimate’ grounds for the recently initiated project of AFRICOM. In fact, the AFRICOM has been the product of the gradually evolving policy of the US and indicated the increased militarization of the US policies in Africa. [Emphasis added]
Placing US military bases in other countries is certainly not a new phenomenon, but the sudden thrust into Africa, especially sub-Saharan Africa, is. The writers suggest that the perceived US hegemony certainly explains some of the change in policy. In the past, the earlier colonial powers in Europe were expected to secure "western interests" in this region of the world. That is no longer a satsifactory arrangement for a country that sees itself as the only super-power.
Then, the inevitable question of ‘why’ arises to reveal the reasons behind such a considerably important policy shift towards Africa. That is, why has Africa suddenly become an important strategic concern for the US to launch such a grand project of AFRICOM?
Regarding such a crucial question, the Bush administration justifies the project of AFRICOM by arguing that it will “… bring peace and security to the people of Africa and promote our common goals of development, health, education, democracy and economic growth in Africa.” In fact, the rhetoric is the same: to solve the problems with the military force ready to intervene into the internal affairs of any country. However, quite interestingly, Bush on his trip to five African countries never referred to AFRICOM, but instead tried to divert attentions to the US humanitarian assistance to the Black Africa
...Many experts have rightly argued that there are mainly three reasons behind the US project of AFRICOM:
The first and foremost reason behind the establishment of the AFRICOM is related with the security of the ‘US access to African natural resources, especially oil.’ It has been widely argued that the US has increasingly become more and more dependent on the African oil. ...
As a second factor behind the US project of AFRICOM, the current rivalry with China over Africa is on the top agenda of the Bush administration to tackle with. In one way or another, the recently increasing engagement of China in Africa has alarmed Washington with the concerns for the security of the US access to the African oil. ...
The third reason commonly referred to explain the real US ambitions behind the initiation of AFRICOM is simply to make Africa another front for the so called war on terrorism. ... [Emphasis added]
In other words, it's about the oil. Oh, and terra terra terra, which is shorthand for using the boogie man to get what the current administration and its corporate sponsors want. How surprising is that?
Apprently at least some African nations are not buying into this oh-so-generous offer for "humanitarian aid" by the US.
...[A] Majority of the African states have demonstrated crucial doubts about the ‘humanitarian’ aspects of the recent US project, and firmly stood against any deployment of US military basis in African soil. Especially such countries as Nigeria and South Africa have explicitly declared that they would not permit such a policy in their countries.
Smart, them. I'm certain the current administration hadn't considered that part of the equation which states that some countries treasure their national sovereignty too much to be easily bought off by promises to paint schools and such like.
324 days
Labels: Africa, American Imperialism
posted by Diane at 8:51 AM
1 Comments:
Chris Floyd has more on the expansion of the "War on Terror" into Africa
Post a Comment
<< Home