America, Somalia and AFRICOM

I always believed that America’s vilification by unsophisticated people allover the world, particularly if matched with oblivion of the nefarious and evil role played allover the world by the colonial powers, England and France, serves only one purpose: the perpetuation of the existing colonial structures which are the only responsible for the underdevelopment, the poverty, the starvation, the tyrannies, the lack of democracy, the genocides, the tortures, and the overall stagnation of all the indigenous peoples.

Anti-Americanism is the top stage of colonialism.

This is an absolute reality that the various sheikhs of Somalia and other countries in Africa and Asia must consistently recall in their minds. The real enemy of all the underdeveloped nations is the Anglo-French colonialism, and the secrecy hidden behind the colonial establishments, the Apostate Freemasonic Lodge that rules them, and through them most of today’s world.

The aforementioned position does not embellish America; neither does it offer Washington indulgentia a culpa e a poena; on the contrary! It only helps understand the realities of our world better. Certainly, America has been responsible for wars, terrorism, exploitation of other countries’ resources, disregard for democracy, freedom, and Human Rights. Many times America pursued policies in Africa, Asia and Latin America that are in striking opposition to the ideals and the principles of the Founding Fathers, and to the spirit and the letter of the American Constitution. Many noticed and denounced repeatedly that what America offers its own citizens Washington denies to others allover the world.

A more careful analysis of the American political establishment would help realize that it is only the pro-British part of the American establishment that has ceaselessly pursued similar policies, acting as subservient to the secret rulers of England and France, and as an instrument for their targets.

However, there is another part of America; a part of the American establishment and a sizeable part of the American people who share the concept that what is offered to Americans should be offered to Somalis, to Oromos, to Persians and others: Freedom, Prosperity, Democracy, National Identity, Human Dignity.

This part of America, a moral, humane and humanist face of today’s America, deplores the colonial policies carried out by the country that was born to be anti-colonial, and therefore anti-British and anti-French, namely America.

This is the part of America that rejects the blasphemous and anti-human pseudo-theory of Evolutionism; this is the part of America that sided with Argentina against England in the so-called Falklands War; this is the part of America that denounced Roosevelt’s decision to make of America a tool in the hands of England. To this – Catholic, Black and Latin (mainly but not exclusively) – part of America, Somalis, Oromos, Aramaeans, Berbers of Kabylia, Furis of Darfur, Baluchis and many others must stretch their hand to reach out and join forces.

An excellent paper has just been published by a leading Humanitarian NGO, Refugees International, which is based in Washington; entitled ‘U.S. Civil Military Imbalance for Global Engagement’; this paper denounces the militaristic purpose of AFRICOM, and suggests a more balanced military and humanitarian budget for America’s African engagement.

I republish here the Executive Summary of the pertinent paper, suggesting to all African Muslims, and particularly the sheikhs whose minds are unfortunately fixed on colonial agendas (without them understanding it), a more nuanced position towards America. It will help greatly all those targeted and suffering in the Horn of Africa region and elsewhere.

U.S. Civil Military Imbalance for Global Engagement: Executive Summary
http://www.refugeesinternational.org/content/article/detail/10763

In his introduction to the 2002 National Security Strategy, President Bush said: "America is now threatened less by conquering states than we are by failing ones". Failing states with weak state institutions struggle to deliver services to their population or to control corruption and are at risk of ongoing conflict. When these countries descend into civil war, massive flows of refugees and large-scale human displacement lead to further regional and global instability. Nowhere is this more of a challenge than in Africa.

There is broad agreement that combating today’s global threats requires a balanced, integrated approach with coordinated defense, diplomacy and development efforts. In practice, the Pentagon is largely dictating America’s approach to foreign policy. The nation’s foreign aid budget is too low; its civilian capacity to construct and carry out effective, long-term policies to rebuild states is too weak; interventions abroad are often unilateral when multilateral solutions could be more effective; and the military, which is well trained to invade countries, not to build them up, is playing an increasingly active and well-funded role in promoting development and democracy. Even Defense Secretary Robert Gates noted that U.S. soldiers conducting development and assistance activities in countries where they frequently don’t speak the language is "no replacement for the real thing – civilian involvement and expertise".

The rising military role in shaping U.S. global engagement is a challenge to the next president. Foreign assistance represents less than one percent of the federal budget, while defense spending is 20%. The U.S. military has over 1.5 million uniformed active duty employees and over 10,100 civilian employees, while the Department of State has some 6,500 permanent employees. Although several high-level task forces and commissions have emphasized the urgent need to modernize our aid infrastructure and increase sustainable development activities, such assistance is increasingly being overseen by military institutions whose policies are driven by the Global War on Terror, not by the war against poverty. Between 1998 and 2005, the percentage of Official Development Assistance the Pentagon controlled exploded from 3.5% to nearly 22%, while the percentage controlled by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) shrunk from 65% to 40%.

This civil-military imbalance has particular ramifications for Africa, where Global War on Terror imperatives do not address the continent’s biggest needs for security assistance. The U.S. is only helping four African countries transform their armies and security agencies into professional organizations that protect citizens rather than abuse them. Resources are allocated in a manner that does not reflect the continent’s most pressing priorities. For example, the U.S. has allocated $49.65 million for reforming a 2,000-strong Liberian army to defend the four million people of that country. In contrast, it only plans to spend $5.5 million in 2009 to help reform a 164,000-strong army in the DR Congo, a country with 65 million people where Africa’s "first world war" claimed the lives of over five million people.

Two case studies emphasize the problems inherent in the U.S. approach. Military dominance over reform programs in Liberia has resulted in a policy focused solely on restructuring Liberia’s army by expensive private contractors, DynCorp and Pacific Architects and Engineers. Meanwhile, intelligence, judiciary, and prison agencies are sadly neglected. In the DR Congo, the State Department has played a very active role in facilitating dialogue among belligerents and is concerned about the humanitarian situation in the east, but the Defense Department is virtually ignoring the nation’s desperate need of military reform. As a result, an inadequately resourced security sector reform program has contributed to the Congolese army becoming a major source of insecurity for civilian communities.

The U.S. military’s new Africa Command (AFRICOM) is poised to become the dominant influence over U.S. policy on the continent. Originally, AFRICOM was promoted as integrating military and civilian agencies for "humanitarian assistance, civic action… and response to natural disasters". After much criticism from African nations and the international humanitarian community, the new AFRICOM Commander is now emphasizing the value the Command can add to the many U.S. military programs already operating in Africa.

AFRICOM should focus on two unashamedly military/political roles that will strengthen peace and security in Africa: a) assisting African countries with defense sector reform; and b) supporting Africa’s regional organizations in building conflict management and standby force capacity. The Command’s legitimacy will ultimately be determined by its ability to work with the African Union and UN operations to address Africa’s principal security challenge – mobilizing sufficient resources to provide a secure, stable and well-governed environment in which human rights are protected and promoted and where business can thrive. Assisting with the coordination of security sector and peacekeeping assistance should be strongly emphasized in its mandate to help national governments absorb the plethora of uncoordinated initiatives from various coalitions of donor countries.

Another priority for AFRICOM should be to enhance peacekeeping capacity-building programs. As a matter of urgency, AFRICOM should establish a core of civil-military expertise specifically related to UN peace operations in Africa. With the demand for African peacekeepers far outstripping the supply of adequately trained and equipped forces, AFRICOM has the potential to increase the number of trained soldiers for UN or AU peace operations.

AFRICOM could also enhance international cooperation for delivering more sustainable support to African efforts to establish peace and security. Instead of having three commanders that deal with Africa as a third or fourth priority, an informed, consistent and coherent engagement with Africa could be established. However, AFRICOM’s current meager budget for bilateral security cooperation falls far short of what is needed to have true credibility and impact. Currently, no funds are allocated for security sector and governance capacity-building for African nations. Instead, funding is being requested for Global War on Terror priorities.

While AFRICOM can improve engagement with African nations, more effective non-military support is needed to provide the basic foundations of stability that would encourage refugees to return home and would meet Africa’s enormous development challenges. Although the current administration is promoting a range of initiatives to redress the imbalance in U.S. instruments for global engagement, these are aimed at a "quick fix" for long-broken machinery.

The next president must strengthen civilian professional capacity to carry out diplomatic and development operations. More funding is needed to address the current 17 to 1 spending imbalance in staffing and resources between defense and diplomatic/development operations, and to reduce the use of contractors in foreign assistance programs. A thorough assessment of both civilian and military capacities to achieve developmental goals must also be conducted.

Doing a few things well in Africa, and doing the right thing in Africa, can have a positive impact on 53 UN member states, help uplift 80% of the world’s poorest people, and win friends and influence in the most under-governed continent in the world. If the establishment of AFRICOM, the strengthening of the State Department’s Africa Bureau and USAID programs in Africa can be seen to produce positive results, the effort could serve as a model for U.S. global engagement.

Refugees International – About Us
http://refugeesinternational.org/section/aboutus/

Our Mission
Refugees International generates lifesaving humanitarian assistance and protection for displaced people around the world and works to end the conditions that create displacement.

Our Challenge
Refugee crises left unattended threaten stability around the world. Recent estimates of the numbers of refugees and internally displaced people have been increased to 34.5 million worldwide—all people who have been forced to flee their homes due to conflict and oppression. Additionally, there are more than 11 million stateless people in the world—often living in limbo, without citizenship rights or protection.

Our Work
Timely responses to refugee crises can increase stability in a region before the conflict spreads across borders. Each year, Refugees International conducts 20 to 25 field missions to assess crisis situations that have caused people to leave their homes or their countries. Based on up-to-date information gathered in the field, we provide governments, international agencies and non-governmental organizations with effective solutions to improve the lives of displaced people.

Our Reputation
Refugees International is a leading advocate for the needs of the world’s most vulnerable and under-represented populations. We are a small, highly effective organization recognized for credibility and accuracy. Our recommendations are highly valued in national and international centers of power—whether they be in the U.S. Congress, U.S. Administration, at the United Nations, or European and other capitals around the world.

Our Impact
On each mission—along with recording the need for basic services such as food, water, shelter and protection from harm—advocates explore a variety of other issues to be addressed, such as health services, access to education, human rights abuses, and circumstances specific to women and children. Because of our efforts, many who are abandoned in camps return home, refugees without food are fed, stateless people have obtained legal status, and families in danger have been moved to safer locations.

Refugees International
2001 S Street NW
Suite 700
Washington, DC 20009
202-828-0110
ri@refintl.org

Note
Picture: Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys