| Jan-Mar 09 | Apr-Jun 09 | Jul-Sept 09 | Oct-Dec 09 | Jan-May 10 | Jun-Dec 10 | Jan-May 11 | Jun-Dec 11 | Jan-May 12 |

[dehai-news] Where Will the U.S. Strike Next in Africa?

From: YPFDJ Boston <ypfdjboston_at_gmail.com_at_dehai.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 00:41:31 -0400

Article Link:
http://www.blackagendareport.com/content/where-will-us-strike-next-africa

*Where Will the U.S. Strike Next in Africa?*

*A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford*

*
*

“*Eritrea’s real sin is to be one of the very few nations in Africa that do
not have military relations with AFRICOM, the U.S. war machine.”*

Under the direction of the United States, the UN Security Council recently
extended sanctions for another year against the northeast African nation of
Eritrea. The country of 6 million people, nestled against the Red Sea, is
on America’s hit list. In the imperial double-speak of Washington, Eritrea
is described as a “destabilizing” force in the region – which simply means
the government in Asmara has refused to buckle under to U.S. military
domination of the Horn of Africa.

Back in 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton threatened to “*take
action<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8186781.stm>
*” – and, by that, she meant make war – against Eritrea if it did not stop
supporting the Shabab resistance fighters in Somalia. There was no evidence
that Eritrea was, in fact, arming the Shabab, and there is no evidence that
Eritrea is doing so, now – as the UN Monitoring Group on Eritrea and
Somalia admits.

The monitors, who are, in effect, tools of U.S. policy, reported that they
found “*no evidence<http://www.safpi.org/news/article/2012/eritrea-reduces-support-al-shabaab-un-report>
*” of Eritrean aid to Somali fighters over the past year, and concluded
that, if such assistance exists at all, it is “negligible.” Yet, the UN
Security Council, under U.S. pressure, extended the sanctions, anyway.
Washington claims that Eritrea’s alleged support for the Shabab has only
halted because of the sanctions, and it’s, therefore, too early to lift
them – which amounts to punishing Eritrea for having the wrong intentions,
whether it acts on them or not.

“*In the imperial double-speak of Washington, Eritrea is described as a
‘destabilizing’ force in the region.”*

It is, of course, not little Eritrea that is destabilizing the Horn of
Africa, but the United States, which has made the region a front line in
its so-called War on Terror. Washington's closest ally in the neighborhood
is Ethiopia, from which Eritrea won its *independence in
1993<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eritrean_War_of_Independence>
*, after a 30-year war. The U.S. instigated, armed, financed and gave
logistical support to Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia, in 2006, plunging
that country into what United Nations observers called “the worst
humanitarian crisis in Africa.” Under American direction, Kenya also *invaded
Somalia<http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/unbacked-invasion-of-somalia-spirals-into-chaos-6276959.html>
*, in the midst of a great famine, last year. The U.S. *bankrolls, arms and
trains<http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-us-somalia-20120729,0,1426936.story>
* the nominally African Union force that occupies Somalia’s capital, and
has turned neighboring Djibouti into the main base for the U.S. Africa
Command, AFRICOM.

And there sits Eritrea, surrounded by warring American puppets, interfering
in no one’s affairs, yet determined to defend her sovereignty – accused by
the world biggest and most aggressive power of destabilizing the region.

Eritrea’s real sin is to be one of the very few nations in Africa that do
not have military relations with AFRICOM, the U.S. war machine. That puts a
bulls-eye on her back, along with Zimbabwe and Sudan, which U.S. Ambassador
to the UN Susan Rice demanded be blockaded and bombed back in the George
Bush administration. Barack Obama’s Africa policy is an extension and
expansion of Bush’s aim to militarize the continent, and the much older
U.S. policy to create chaos and horrific human suffering in those regions
it cannot directly control. In practice, Obama’s doctrine is the same as
Bush: “You are either with us or against us.”

Eritrea rejects that doctrine; that’s why it is a target. For Black Agenda
Radio, I’m Glen Ford. On the web, go to BlackAgendaReport.com.

-- 
YPFDJ Boston
Awet n'Hafash
Received on Thu Aug 09 2012 - 01:17:40 EDT
Dehai Admin
© Copyright DEHAI-Eritrea OnLine, 1993-2012
All rights reserved