|
WHY A U.S. MILITARY COMMAND IN AFRICA?
 I
first heard of AFRICOM in February of this year when President Bush made his
perfunctory visit to a few "friendly" African countries. Some of the continent’s
leaders had already heard rumblings of the United States administration’s
"strategic concern" about Africa in early 2006 when then Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld conceived, incubated and hatched the United States Military
Command for Africa. AFRICOM, with little scrutiny from Congress, was formally
approved by Bush on February 6, 2007. On September 28, 2007 the Senate confirmed
four-star General William E. Ward as its first commander. By October 1, 2007
AFRICOM was fully established and went into full operation on October 1, 2008.
When Bush tried to pawn AFRICOM off on Ghana, President John Kufuor’s
protest, "You’re not going to build any bases in Ghana!" echoed across Africa. I
sensed its reverberations as far away as Kenya. In a subsequent press interview
Bush remarked that the very idea was "baloney, or as we say in Texas, that’s
bull". Africanologists, NGOs and other humanitarian and development personnel,
both in the United States and throughout Africa, were immediately skeptical and
aggressively took issue with the proposal.
Earlier this year the following statement by Defense Secretary Robert Gates
was reported in a Washington Post (1 June 2008) article, "I think in some
respects we probably didn’t do as good a job as we should have when we rolled
out AFRICOM….I don’t think we should push African governments to a place they
don’t really want to go in terms of relationships". Yet today’s New York
Times (5 Oct ’08) announced that "Last week, in a small Pentagon conference
hall, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, inaugurated the newest regional headquarters, Africa
Command, which is responsible for coordinating American military affairs on the
continent." In a small Pentagon conference hall? And no one apparently took the
trouble to consult the Africans. Revealing!
While the United States government claims the new military command will
strengthen ties and increase humanitarian work in Africa, serious doubt is being
expressed by many of the continent’s 53 Heads of State,, And for good reason.
AFRICOM’s mission statement speaks of promoting a "secure African environment in
support of United States foreign policy".
Africa beware! This is not just another "Ho-Hum" affair. When the
newly-elected George H. W. Bush was asked what his policy toward Africa would
be, he responded "I have no policy toward that country (sic!)". In the context
of that interview, he reflected a basic principle of United States engagement in
foreign affairs, namely, "We will only engage when it is in our own best
national interest." World conditions have radically changed in the last eight
years, unfortunately the principle has not.
AFRICOM signals a new grab for Africa. The United States administration is
eager to secure and control Africa’s natural resources, especially petroleum,
uranium, colombo-tantalite (coltan) and diamonds, all key to its trade
interests, which are facing powerful competition from China. Then there is the
"war on terror". The use of weapons to combat terrorist threats in Africa will
not achieve national security, neither for Africa nor the U.S. On the contrary,
AFRICOM is a dangerous proliferation of U.S. military might around the globe,
which will only inflame greater threats against the United States, while
delaying African solutions to African problems.
The Pentagon has been forced to trim its ambitious designs for Africa because
many influential African governments are refusing to host AFRICOM’s
headquarters, and humanitarian groups are demanding the United States stop the
militarization of aid to Africa. The United States Military Command For Africa
is based initially at Kelley Barracks in Stuttgart, Germany, while the search
continues for countries in which to place the first five permanent military
bases in sub-Saharan Africa.
This is a critical issue which has not been sufficiently brought before the
people of the United States. There is any number of initiatives that can and
should be taken by government and civil society to help develop and secure
African countries without a foreign military presence. Policy toward Africa must
be rooted in the principle of self-determination and sovereignty . If the United
States is not noble enough to help the suffering masses of Africa to live a more
fully human life, not in its own best national interest, but in their own best
national interest, then the United States should stay out of the continent
entirely.
Bert Ebben, O.P.
6 October 2008
|
