Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 19:13:53 +0200
>From Puppet Soldiers to Puppet Journalists: AFRICOM Grows Its War Machine
by Mark P. Fancher
Thurs, 05/29/2014 - 10:44 — Mark P. Fancher
“AFRICOM is courting journalists and attempting to direct media coverage of
U.S. military activities.”
AFRICOM’s primary project is to transform the militaries of the continent
into dependencies and pawns of U.S. foreign policy. It’s second most import
objective is the hide Washington’s actual intentions behind a “humanitarian”
mask – such as participating in the search for Nigerian schoolgirls from
Boko Haram. Some African journalists are eager to be part of the ruse.
The greatest danger to Africa posed by U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM)
involves neither drones nor armed troops. It is instead the command’s
sinister, cynical use of manipulative deception. With Houdini-like
misdirection it opportunistically draws attention either to its military
operations or to its purported humanitarian missions. All the while it is
simultaneously engaged in low profile, seemingly harmless psychological
operations that have the potential for long-term devastating effects on the
African continent.
One of the most recent of these operations was a so-called “public affairs
and media symposium” conducted for African journalists. This weeklong event
attracted more than 60 participants who heard presentations on humanitarian
aid, reporting on armed conflicts, social media, and how to interact with
military public affairs offices.
AFRICOM’s website quoted a journalist from Togo as saying: “This is an
opportunity for me as a director of the editorial staff of my journal to get
closer with the Army to know their problems and understand their issues
before I form my public opinion.”
General David Rodriguez, AFRICOM’s commander said the conference was part of
the effort to build relationships with African countries. He said: “In the
near term, we are working with multinational partners and interagency to
address immediate challenges of violent extremism and regional instability
including threats to both U.S. personnel and facilities.”
Of course, the quickest, easiest way to protect U.S. personnel and
facilities is to simply remove them from Africa. It is, however an approach
the U.S. will never choose for reasons identified decades ago by some who
helped usher in Africa’s era of flag independence. In 1965, Kwame Nkrumah
explained: “Africa’s raw materials are an important consideration in the
military build-up of the NATO countries, in which are included those of the
European Common Market. Their industries, especially the strategic and
nuclear factories, depend largely upon the primary materials that come from
the less developed countries.”
Nkrumah also identified the hand-in-glove relationship of the military and
the media. He said: ”…the enormous monopoly press, together with the outflow
of slick, clever, expensive magazines, attends to what it chooses to call
‘news.’ Within separate countries, one or two news agencies control the news
handouts, so that a deadly uniformity is achieved, regardless of the number
of separate newspapers or magazines; while internationally, the financial
preponderance of the United States is felt more and more through its foreign
correspondents and offices abroad, as well as through its influence over
international capitalist journalism.”
“The quickest, easiest way to protect U.S. personnel and facilities is to
simply remove them from Africa.”
The vital importance of media was recognized early on by western
imperialism. Frantz Fanon, who was actively engaged in Algeria’s
anti-colonial struggles during the 1950s noted that a radio program called
“The Voice of Fighting Algeria” did much to enlighten and mobilize Algerians
against French domination. Fanon explained: “The French authorities,
however, began to realize the importance of this progress of the people in
the technique of news dissemination. After a few months of hesitancy, legal
measures appeared. The sale of radios was now prohibited, except on
presentation of a voucher issued by the military security or police
services. The sale of battery sets was absolutely prohibited, and spare
batteries were practically withdrawn from the market.” Fanon went on to say:
“The programs were then systematically jammed, and the Voice of Fighting
Algeria soon became inaudible.” It is against this historical backdrop that
African journalists participated in a symposium hosted by the U.S. military.
Obviously, AFRICOM is courting journalists and attempting to direct media
coverage of U.S. military activities. From the outset, how AFRICOM is
portrayed to the public has been of major concern to the Pentagon. At the
time of its creation, AFRICOM was met with great skepticism globally, and it
faced considerable opposition in Africa with only one African country
indicating a willingness to allow establishment of AFRICOM’s headquarters on
its soil. During the command’s infancy, AFRICOM’s then deputy for military
operations Robert T. Moeller said there was a misconception that AFRICOM was
part of “a U.S. effort to militarize Africa, and that’s definitely not the
case.”
Notwithstanding AFRICOM’s claims of innocence, suspicion has dogged the
command for the duration of its existence, and its public relations
headaches are likely to increase. As people around the world proclaim “bring
back our girls,” recent suggestions that the U.S. indirectly fueled the
growth of Boko Haram will probably receive increasing attention. The U.S.
played a significant role in arming forces that opposed Libyan leader
Moammar Gadhafi. In 2012 Reuters reported that a United Nations
investigation found evidence that many of these weapons, including
“rocket-propelled grenades, machine guns, with anti-aircraft visors,
automatic rifles, ammunition, grenades” and other weapons were smuggled out
of Libya and found their way into the hands of al-Qaeda and its affiliates,
including Boko Haram.
While AFRICOM’s logic and motives in trying to win the allegiance of African
journalists are obvious, the thoughts and objectives of the symposium
participants are an enigma. Presumably there are only two possible reasons
why journalists would attend this conference. Either they were extremely
naïve and honestly believed these sessions would aid their professional
development; or, they have chosen to become conscious and willing propaganda
agents. In either case, trouble looms for Africa with so-called
“journalists” of this caliber generating information for the continent to
consume.
Mark P. Fancher is an attorney who writes frequently about the U.S. military
presence in Africa. He can be contacted at <mailto:mfancher_at_comcast.net>
mfancher_at_comcast.net.
http://blackagendareport.com/sites/www.blackagendareport.com/files/imagecach
e/feature400/US-AFRICOM-Photo.jpg
(image/jpeg attachment: image002.jpg)