Gold Digging: Will Mali be Obama’s Afghanistan?

When I think of Mali, or any part of West Africa, I often say to myself, I had a ball when I was there in 1992 and 1993. At the time I was living in Owerri, in Southeastern Nigeria. And if you have ever seen the Sahel, what sticks out from a geo-political locution is that it runs from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea.

But the country, inclusive of the history of the Dogon and those who inhabit the Mopti river region of that great historic place, may be the location of America’s next war of western imperialism and neocolonial fervor. To top it all off, it will be carried out via the instruction of the first African America President in the history of the United States.

It seems that Obama drone wars will have to find a new country to target since the US will be ending its occupation of Afghanistan soon. And since the Administration’s war on terror has not ended, the obvious next place to send US and UN troops is Africa, specifically Mali. Now I know we have US troops in the Congo, Uganda, Somalia and several other nations, but I have an inclination that Obama will be in this West African nation soon.

All of this would have been unnecessary if the administration had not taken the actions via the UN it did in Libya. In fact, Mali was a stable democracy for the last few decades until we destabilized. Not only did it lead to arms from Libya flooding the northern region of the nation, it also leads to the influx of al-Qaeda affiliated Islamists in the North.

Some would say that I am making this entire up. However, I would say that they have not been reading or paying attention or worse, they do know evaluate historical actions that would make the suggestion that the Obama Administration would be supportive of Western military forces in Mali. The US in concert with the UN has conducted armed interventions (with support from Obama). We saw such in Libya where via the UN; Obama although in direct violation of the US constitution, never consulted congress to overthrow the leader of a sovereign nation. Even though it required supporting militarily, Islamic fundamentalist militants and Al Qaeda and resulted in the — ethnic cleansing and lynchings of thousands black Africans.

We also saw such when the Obama Administration and the UN aided in the violent overthrow of the President of the Ivory Coast although the nations highest court that he had won the election. He was subsequently replaced by a UN hand-picked Muslim central banker. This too resulted in the death of thousands most of which were Christians.

We are already hearing the administration and UN drop little hints about al Qaeda having set up in northern Mali, right next to Boko Haram in Nigeria. Not to mention the Islamic Maghreb, al Shabab in East Africa. Especially if the story is being laid out by Robert Fowler of the UN. In addition, Last year the UN Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution “determining that the situation in Mali constitutes a threat to international peace and security.” The resolution also noted that the UN was ready to deploy an “international military force” to invade the country if such is seemed necessary.

Stranger is that this is all coming from the urging really, of the Obama State Department – that is the ideal of invading Mali - to prop up the interim government. The Obama administration has also been increasing military aid to leaders of ruling countries around Mali in preparation for the upcoming intervention. Not to mention that last year, President Obama ended all of Mali’s trade privileges with the US, citing backtracking from democracy in the annual assessment of benefits conferred by the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) program. Funny, the way I see it, taking the limited benefits they had under the prior arrangements will only punch prospects for democracy farther away. Especially given he approved such with the South Sudan, who is in conflict with Sudan. Mali only exported about $7 million from precious stones, gold, art and antiques, while imports from the U.S. exceeded $40 million. But that’s right; the South Sudan has the plentiful Abyei oil region.

Funny, Mali used to be Africa’s democratic success stories, now it may be the next Somalia, or even worse – Afghanistan. If the President does involve US military forces in Mali, it will be a tacit confession that his actions in Libya failed and really served to undermine international peace and security., It will reveal to history that his Libyan interventionist policy was his biggest foreign policy mistake and that helping Africa is the farthest thing from his policy perspectives when compared to the old imperialistic agenda of raping the continent of all its natural resources while killing million via war, starvation, poverty and drought in the process.Yes Mali may be Obama's Afghanistan and all because there is gold in them their hills. Afterall, Mali is Africa's third largest gold producer after South Africa and Ghana. Mali produced 53,7 t of gold in 2009.

Is Obama King Leopold II Revisited

In Areopagitica, John Milton wrote: “Let truth and falsehood grapple: whoever knew truth, put to the worse, in a free and open encounter?”

He wrote this in either 1644 as an appeal to the English Parliament to end a political order that attempted and bring all publishing under control by official government censors (authors would submit their work for approval prior to having it published). It is a terse yet polemical parallel to the Areopagiticus of Isocrates and the story of the apostle Paul in Athens from Acts 17: 18-34. The first pertaining to the “degradation of the judges of the Court of the Areopagus, the highest court in Greece.” However, one can also apply this to political tyranny axiologically as well, in particular when it concerns facts as a function of political action and mandate.

Over the past few years, the Obama administration has increased rather aggressively its foot print, militarily in Africa. Under the guise of fighting for the righteous neoliberalim to defeat tyranny and kleptocratic rule in the name of democracy, the Obama administration has boldly implemented a path in Africa similar to those seen in past history. Especially that of King Leopold II (1835-1909).

In 1876, Belgium’s King Leopold II held a conference in Brussels in which he asserted that Western nations should establish an international benevolent committee for the propagation of civilization among the peoples of Central Africa (the Congo region). Between the years of 1878 to 1884, it resulted in an eventual Belgian sovereignty, in the Congo Basin. His primary objective was to exploit the lucrative ivory and rubber market in Central Africa. After proclaiming sovereign Belgium state rights, and via three successive decrees, Leopold asserted rights of proprietorship over all vacant lands throughout the Congo territory and reduced the rights of the Congolese in their land to native villages and farms. His goals were so colonialist and imperialistic that those who refused or failed to supply enough rubber often had their villages burned down, children murdered, and their hands cut off.

It is now 2012, and President Obama is seemingly on the same path. It started in Libya with a fake and non-extant humanitarian mission to protect the citizens of the oil-rich African nation. However it resulted in the merciless and brutal overthrow of a government and the death of a leader, Muammar Gaddafi who was making progress and vowed to create a 'United States of Africa' after his election as head of the African Union. Since last November, we have observed President Barack Obama send U.S. troops to Africa to help hunt down the leaders of the Lord's Resistance Army in and around Uganda. In his own words, Obama stated, “I believe that deploying these U.S. armed forces furthers U.S. national security interests and foreign policy and will be a significant contribution toward counter-LRA efforts in central Africa.” Ironic is just as Libya, Uganda is sitting on tons of oil. Oil exploration began in Uganda’s northwestern Lake Albert basin nearly a decade ago and according to estimates by the Energy Ministry, the African nation has over two billion barrels of oil. And as I wrote last October, “billionaire George Soros is a member of its executive board and personally, just recently recommended the U.S. deploy a special advisory military team to Uganda.”

In addition, in fall 2009, the Obama administration announced a security assistance package for Mali – valued at 4.5 to 5.0 million dollars – that included 37 Land Cruiser pickup trucks, communication equipment, replacement parts, clothing and other individual equipment and was intended to enhance Mali’s ability to transport and communicate with internal security forces throughout the country and control its borders. Plus, his recently passed NDAA contained $75 million in U.S. aid aimed at fighting in Somalia and arming forces, particularly from Uganda and Burundi, as well as the armies of Djibouti, Kenya and Ethiopia.

Over the past few weeks, after the coup in the West African country of Mali, it has been uncovered that the leader Capt. Amadou Haya Sanogo, who led a renegade military faction that deposed Mali’s democratically elected president, has been in the United States several times to receive professional military education and training. Although official Obama administration doesn’t support the overthrow of the formerly elected leader and that the U.S. Africa Command has suspended military cooperation with Mali, U.S. military personnel continue to deploy to Mali in part of a so-called Joint Planning Assistance Team.

I can go on with more, but such is not the case. The goal is to point out, as Milton asserted that when “truth and falsehood” do battle, truth always wins “in a free and open encounter.”This part of a total plan hatched by the Obama administration. We know that he has sent military advisors which are still on the ground in Nigeria and have had them there since 2009. And I find it ironic that our first African American President would be the one, as Leopold did, to establish a permanent US military beach head in Africa, for the advancement of a long-range Anglo-American geopolitical agenda for Africa.

The query is does it serve our best interest? Is it for the benefit of Africa or is it to challenge China’s economic interests in Africa? Or is it to reinvigorate the west past preoccupation with raping Africa for its resources for other plutocratic interest? In the past there were for human resources mainly for the utility of mining and slavery, today they are natural resources in the name of Oil, gold, diamonds, nickel, palladium, copper, zinc, silver or others? I am just asking, we already have US special forces and other military personnel on the ground in five African nations and that’s just on the record.

If my postulate is true and the aforementioned is even remotely plausible, then we should get ready for more famine, death, disease and all as the result of contrived wars in the name on benevolence as suggested by Leopold or national security as detailed by President Obama. Simple fact is that one cannot have either benevolence or security when the outcome is poverty, genocide and morbidity.

Obama Administration Policy on Middle East and Africa all over the place

If one has followed President Obama’s statements and position on the middle east and North Africa prior to his policy speech on the region last week, you like me probably have no clue to the reasoning behind his words. After reading his remarks last Wednesday, I am even in more of a stupor of consternation.

What I can say is that his approach and policy alike are whimsical or fickle at best and unprincipled and inconsistent at worse – thus the rarefied stupor I alluded to previously. For example, I recall how initially in Egypt, he proclaimed his support for Hosni Mubarak in word, but fleetly altered this position upon the observation that President Mubarak did not have the support of the military. Similarly in Bahrain, he offered effeminate words of support for the long ruling leadership yet at the same time; he attempted to protect the leadership and longtime alley for the sake of the fleet anchored in its harbor. Even as the Monarch, with the aid of Saudi Tanks and military, killed unarmed protesters, the administration and its figure head turned a blind eye to the citizenry desire for democratic rule and liberty. This same behavior and action drew harsh military reprisals and words from Obama via NATO requesting Muammar el-Qaddafi leave office.

In Libya, our military are protecting the innocent, but we do no such protection for those in Yemen, Syria or Bahrain. In his speech, Obama commented, the “humiliation that takes place every day in many parts of the world – the relentless tyranny of governments that deny their citizens dignity. “ He added “we can – and will – speak out for a set of core principles – principles that have guided our response to the events over the past six months: “In fact the President eludes to hearing the calls for help, but strangely it is only in the middle east and Libya but no other parts of Africa.

The problem for me is that there is not one standard stated; for there isn't any unifying principle that guides this new policy. Meaning, that any effective policy for unstabilized governments on our behalf will require coherence, which thus far is lacking. Will he treat all attacks on the general populations the same? Will King Abdullah of Saudi be held to the same standard of Qaddafi? What makes a distinction to have different positions between Qaddafi and Syria’s president Bashar al-Assad? He did not even mention Bahrain or Saudi Arabia in his speech.

The Obama administration is all over the place, for to say we hear the calls for democracy yet cover our ears from similar cries from the Congo, Uganda, Sudan and other nations is disingenuous and fails the litmus test of reality and consistency.

Obama's State Department Turns Away From and ignores Sub Saharan Africa

President Obama is quick to join the protest against Republicans both inside and outside the Beltway. Likewise, his “on the job training” in dealing with social unrest in North Africa and the Arabian Peninsula is also prominent, especially when it makes him looks grand standing on the side of Democracy In Tunisia and Egypt. This is in stark contrast to the manner in which he deals with similar issues in Sub Saharan Africa.

There are several troubled spots in Sub Saharan Africa currently that neither the media, President Obama or his State department have addressed publically. Most prominently are what is occurring in Uganda, The Ivory Coast, the Sudan or even what is occuring in Zimbabwe. If Fact until today, Obama has been basicaly quiet on what is occuring in the Ivory Coast.

In Uganda, President Museveni, the formal rebel leader has been in power ever since he took control of the nation twenty five years ago. He is a very close ally of the United States and receives 100s of millions of dollars in Aid annually – while the populating is gripped in extreme poverty and joblessness. Obama has never addressed or spoken about the dozens of deaths over since 2009 occurring during youth protest against the government. Even this week, thousands took to the streets of Kampala but they are ignored and portrayed as invisible by the present US administration.

In the Ivory Coast, after free and fair elections, Laurent Gbagbo still refuses to step down after losing the presidential elections this past November. Although this past December, President Barack Obama urged Ivory Coast’s incumbent leader to cede power to the “legitimate winner” of the polls, he was not as forceful as he has been with his counterparts in North Africa or even in Iran. The United States has agreed with Ecowas that sanctions should be put in place but outside of that has shown no leadership on the issue. Mean while, Ivory Coast's incumbent leader has seized four major international banks that had shut down operations because the banks did not respect the law and closed without proper notice. The banks included offices for Britain's Standard Chartered, France's BNP–Paribas and Societe Generale along with U.S. bank Citibank.

In the Sudan, students, mobilized by online social networks, rioted in Khartoum, throwing stones at police cars and chanting. Unlike the recent uprising in Tunisia and the ongoing one in Egypt, but there is also the issue of southern Sudan's recent referendum vote, which approved secession from the north. As Khartoum is located in northern Sudan, it remains unclear what relation, if any, the uprising has to the recent referendum. One thing is clear, however: the winds of change are blowing across Africa and the Middle East, and whether they will bring stability and democracy or more civil war and dictatorship remains to be seen.

Prior to Tunisia's popular revolt, Sudan was the last Arab country to overthrow a leader with popular protests, ousting Jaafar Nimeiri in 1985. And just like the other recent revolts, the Sudan is in an economic crisis associated with government overspending and bloated import bills caused foreign currency shortages and forced an effective devaluation of the Sudanese pound last year.