It may be currently unfashionable to assign Africa's troubles to colonialism
and external powers, but in the case of the continent's second largest
country, DRCongo, it would be difficult to come to any other conclusion. And
across the continent a similar scenario is being played out in northern
Mali. We reveal how foreign players and their African allies are fanning the
flames of these conflicts.
After 50 years of independence, Africa is now more mature and able to take
responsibility for its own shortcomings without blaming external forces,
especially the West.
But history teaches us that the people of DRCongo have truly been brutalised
and exploited for the last 100 years - sometimes with the connivance, if not
active participation, of some Western powers and corporations. What about
the assassination of Congo's first elected prime minister, Patrice Lumumba?
And the suffering still continues. There is a thread running through the
serious harm done to the country by the killing of Lumumba on 17 January
1961 - 52 long years ago this January - to the troubles in Congo today.
It might seem as though the Congolese never learn - that is if we only look
at the surface without digging deeper to see the hidden hands behind some of
the unending conflicts in that unfortunate country. In December 2000, the
then US Congresswoman, Cynthia Mckinney, stood up in the Congress and
thundered: "The whole world knows that Uganda and Rwanda are allies of the
United States and that they have been given a carte blanche for whatever
reason to wreck havoc in the Congo."
On 17 May 2001, Wayne Marsden, the American investigative journalist and
author of the book, Genocide and Covert Operations in Africa 1993-1999,
testified before the Congressional Subcommittee on International Operations
and Human Rights Committee on International Relations. Marsden's "prepared
testimony and statement for the record" was so revealing that the West's
mainstream media refused to print it. But New African printed it in full in
our September 2001 issue.
Here is part of what Marsden told the Congress: "Prior to the first Rwandan
invasion of Zaire/DRC in 1996, a phalanx of US intelligence operatives
converged on Zaire. Their actions suggested a strong interest in Zaire's
eastern defences. The No.2 person at the US embassy in Kigali [Rwanda],
travelled to eastern Zaire to initiate intelligence contacts with the
Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire (AFDL-CZ)
rebels under the command of the late President Laurent Kabila. The Rwandan
embassy official met with rebel leaders at least 12 times. The political
officer of the US embassy in Kinshasa, Congo, accompanied by a CIA
operative, travelled with AFDL-CZ rebels through the eastern Zaire forests
for weeks after the 1996 Rwandan invasion of Zaire.
"The US embassy official conceded that he was in Goma to do more than meet
rebel leaders for lunch. Explaining his presence, he said: 'What I am here
to do is to acknowledge them [the rebels] as a very significant military and
political power on the scene, and, of course, to represent American
interests'."
Marsden went on: "There is more than ample evidence that elements of the US
military and intelligence community may have - on varying occasions - aided
and abetted the systematic pillaging by the Ugandan and Rwandan militaries
[of Congo's resources]. A UN report named the United States, Germany,
Belgium and Kazakhstan as leading buyers of the illegally exploited
resources from the DRC.
"The Pentagon was forced to admit on 6 August 1998 that a 20-man US Army
Rwanda Interagency Assessment Team was in Rwanda at the time of the second
RPF [Rwanda Patriotic Front] invasion of Congo [in August 1998]. The
camouflaged unit was deployed from the US-European Command in Germany. It
was later revealed that the team in question was a JCET [Joint Combined
Exchange Training] unit that was sent to Rwanda to help the Rwandans to
'defeat ex-FAR (Rwandan Armed Forces) and Interhamwe units'.
"It is my observation that America's early support for [Laurent] Kabila,
which was aided and abetted by US allies Rwanda and Uganda, had less to do
with getting rid of the Mobutu regime than it had to do with opening up
Congo's vast mineral riches to North American-based and influenced mining
companies.
"The US military and intelligence agencies, which have supported Rwanda and
Uganda in their cross-border adventures in the DRC, have resisted peace
initiatives and have failed to produce evidence of war crimes by the
Ugandans and Rwandans and their allies in Congo. There must be a full
accounting before the Congress by the staff of the US defence attache's
office in Kigali and certain US embassy staff members in Kinshasa who served
from early 1994 to the present time. It is beyond time for the Congress to
seriously examine the role of the United States in the genocide and civil
wars of Central Africa. At the very least, the United States, as the world's
leading democracy, owes Africa at least the example of a critical
self-inspection."
This was an American speaking to power in America - in 2001. Some might ask:
"Why go all the way back to 2001 and rack old wounds." But it is not a
matter of racking old wounds. It is a matter of the thread linking the
assassination of Lumumba, the support for Mobutu, the support for Laurent
Kabila to overthrow Mobutu, the support for Rwanda and Uganda to kick out
Laurent Kabila when he wouldn't play ball, continuing to this day, and
causing innocent Congolese to suffer ad infinitum.
And it is not only Congo. What is happening in Mali looks like a perfect
African conflict. Until you read our lead cover story on pages 12-17 in this
issue. Isn't it time for somebody to listen to what Wayne Marsden said in
2001: "At the very least," he pleaded, "the United States, as the world's
leading democracy, owes Africa at least the example of a critical
self-inspection." Can we not add: "Don't the United States and its Western
and importantly African allies owe Africa at least the example of a critical
self-inspection"?
The stories on the following pages may not be "new" stories, but they are
new chapters. As one commentator put it, "they are at it again", and for as
long as "they are at it", Africa and New African will hold them to account.