Archives for;

PanAfricanism አፍሪካዊነት

Rwanda is accused of Genocide for the 2nd time. Tutsis regime in power rejects their Ethiopian origin and national recognition of the Hutu and the Twa as a main cause of Genocide . Prof. Muse Tegegne

In  the epic  of the  1973  Bawetu and  Batutsi conflict of Burundi,  the Emperor of  Ethiopia Haile Selassie  invited to the Tutsi minority to immigrate  back to their homeland Ethiopia and resolve the Tutsi Question in the great lakes  defensively.   He even later suggested swap of population between Rwanda and Burundi.  The Negus sent a messenger saying:-

Come and let me give a region bigger than Burundi /Rwanda” and let me send you planes to start the Exodus like the Rastafarians in Shashemene. “

The Genocide of the Tutsi accused of their origin and the moderate Hutu as collaborator

The Melese Zenawie regime in Addis Ababa who supposedly helped the liberation of Rwanda and received a heroic medal did not send a single solider to stop the bloody massacre of the Tutsis due to their Ethiopian identity. The Tutsi were thrown to the Nile River after slaughtered as a sacrifice ram  and told to return back where they came from. A bloody massacred that turned the river red, like plague of Egypt in the Bible, which scared even   the population of   Cairo to drink from the Nile waters in the aftermath the genocide. Melese Znawie did not move his finger but not ashamed to receive a heroic medal for the “bloody spectacle” at the massacre of the people of Ethiopian origin in the Great Lake region. He would have refused the medal after visiting the Genocide Museum of Rwanda. How can one accused of a genocide could receive a  medal for a Genocide? This is done to wash his crime committed in Ethiopia against the Anuaks and others . Now is the time for Melese prepare a medial for his friend Kagme to wash him white from the coming indictment. The African dictators start delivering  and honoring one another for the misfortune   they committed  while in power against their own  defenseless populations.

Today the government of Rwanda is working to destroy the identity of Ethiopianism in the Great Lakes with his friend dictator Melese  in the Horn of Africa.   Melese with his Ethnic federation is destroying what is left of Ethiopia and Kagame is denying the identity of the people of Ethiopian origin. Today as in Addis Ababa at Kigali   to claim once identity as to be Ethiopian Tutsi is to be Jews in the National   Weimar Republic.  The Rwandese regime refused even to recognize the existence of the TWA the original inhabitants of the great lake region who were victim of the 1994 genocide like the rest of the Tutsis and moderate Hutu. According to the UN  30% of the Twa population of Rwanda died in the fighting.[1] The Twa were one of the Ethnic three David Stars engraved on the national flag of Burundi at its outset.

The Rwanda’s main cause of the Genocide is a taboo   to recognize publicly in Kigali once Ethiopian identity. The regime of Rwanda publically declare”There is No Tutsi or Hutu, but Rwandan ” he did not mentioned the Twa since  no one care about them any  way.  The majority of the population rejects this imposition to this day. The government who is now stands accused by the UN as a perpetuator of genocide even in Congo against its own population.

It is a Logical Fallacy to believe that Two Wrongs Make a Right (“Wrong + wrong = right.”).

“An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.” “There are many causes that I am prepared to die for but no causes that I am prepared to kill for.” .. (Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi)

The Twa are often ignored in discussions about the conflict between the Hutus and Tutsis, which reached its height in the Rwandan genocide of 1994.

The colonial powers were responsible for the creation of these hate and division among the Rwandese is undeniable fact and easy accusation. People in Glass Houses Shouldn’t Throw Stones,   post colonial  the governments in Rwanda and Burundi did not help to create bondage among the three Ethnic groups in the country that of the majority Hutu and the minority Tutsi and dominated Twa. They demonstrated unprecedented massacre of their mutual  population in the post colonial period.

Rwanda experienced Africa’s worst genocide in modern times, and the country’s recovery was stained by unnecessary   intervention in the conflict in neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo.

The country has been beset by ethnic tension associated with the traditionally unequal relationship between the dominant Tutsi minority and the majority Hutus at the departure of the colonial power.

In 1959 the ethnic relationship was reversed to the favor of the agricultural Huts taken power. The civil war that followed forced over 200,000 Tutsis to flee to Burundi and the rest of the Great lake region with a lingering resentment which led to periodic massacres of Tutsis.

In 1993from the neighboring Rwanda the Tutsi-led Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) launched a military campaign to control the country. At the outcome at least 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus had been brutally massacred in 1994. Some two million Hutus fled to Zaire, today’s DR Congo. They included some of those responsible for the massacres, and some joined Zairian forces to attack local Tutsi.  Rwanda did not recognize the Tutsi a distinct people but invaded refugee camps dominated by Hutu militiamen as a response to the Genocide taking justice in its hand.

Rwanda withdrew its forces from DR Congo in 2002. Later Rwanda continues accusing the Congolese army of aiding Hutu genocidal rebels in eastern DR Congo.

Rwanda has used traditional “gacaca” community courts to try those suspected of taking part in the 1994 genocide. But key individuals – particularly those accused of orchestrating the slaughter – appear before an International Criminal Tribunal in northern Tanzania.

Today the only way out for Rwanda is to recognize the cultural identity of the three distinct people that composed Rwanda and make a democratic reelection based on one man one vote according to Mandela. The recent election of Paul Kagame for the coming 7 year is the same as his friend Melese Zenawie who gave him the necessary expertise to rage election shamelessly and claim to win over 90% of the ballet.

Rwanda must recognize her misdeeds in Congo and bring those military leaders to justice and learn from South African Experience to create a Reconciliation Committee and resolve the conflict once for and all.

Prof. Muse Tegegne   the author wrote and dedicated a Book for the Rwanda Genocide in 1999

In 1992 in hist Book Stigma  Predicted coming  the Genocide …

THe Children of the Ark in French.


1.”Minorities under Siege: Pygmies today in Africa”. UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. 2006. Retrieved 2006-12-11.

Timeline: 100 days of genocide


BBC

Last Updated: Tuesday, 6 April, 2004, 08:42 GMT 09:42 UK
Some 800,000 Rwandans, mainly Tutsis, were murdered in a 100-day period following the killing of the Hutu president of Rwanda, Juvenal Habyarimana.
The presidential guard quickly murdered the political opposition and enacted a pre-planned campaign of slaughter that spread across the country. Soldiers, government officials and business leaders organised the killings and were joined by a Hutu militia, the Interahamwe.

The international community did little to stop the killings and the slaughter was brought to end by the military defeat of the government by the Rwandan Patriotic Front, a Tutsi-led rebel group.

6 April 1994: President Habyarimana and Burundian President Cyprien Ntaryamira are killed when the Rwandan leader’s plane is shot down as it is about to land at Kigali Airport. Hutu extremists opposed to the Arusha Peace Accords are believed to be behind the attack.

7 April: The Rwandan armed forces and Interahamwe militia begin the systematic killing of Tutsis and moderate Hutus. UN forces, unwilling to breach their mandate, fail to intervene. 10 Belgian UN peacekeepers are killed.

8 April: The Tutsi Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) launches a major offensive to end the killings and rescue 600 of its troops based in Kigali under the Arusha Accords.

9-10 April: French, Belgian and American civilians are rescued by their governments.

11 April: The International Red Cross (IRC) estimates that tens of thousands have been slaughtered. UN soldiers protecting 2,000 Tutsis at a school are ordered to withdraw to Kigali airport. Most are killed after their departure.

14 April: Belgium withdraws its troops from the UN peacekeeping force in Rwanda.

15 April: Slaughter of thousands of Tutsis gathered at Nyarubuye Church seeking protection.

21 April: The UN cuts the level of its forces in Rwanda by 90% to just 270 troops. The IRC estimates the dead could now number over 100,000.

30 April: The UN agrees a resolution condemning the killing but omits the word ‘genocide’. Tens of thousands of refugees flee into neighbouring Burundi, Tanzania and Zaire.

Mid-May: The IRC estimates that 500,000 Rwandans have been killed.

17 May: The UN Security Council issues a fresh resolution saying that ‘acts of genocide may have been committed’. It also agrees to send 5,500 troops with new powers to defend civilians, however deployment is delayed by disagreements between the US and UN over the financing of the operation.

22 May: RPF forces gain control of Kigali airport and Kanombe barracks, and extend their control over the northern and eastern parts of Rwanda.

22 June: With arguments over the deployment still continuing, the UN authorises an emergency force of 2,500 French troops under Operation Turquoise to create a ‘safe’ area in the government-controlled part of Rwanda. The killing of Tutsis continues in the ‘safe’ area despite the presence of the French.

4 July: The RPF takes control of Kigali and the southern town of Butare. Its leadership claims it will form a government on the basis of the Arusha Accords.

13-14 July: Refugees fleeing the RPF advance in north-western Rwanda flood into Zaire. Approximately 10,000-12,000 refugees per hour cross the border into the town of Goma. The massive influx creates a severe humanitarian crisis, as there is an acute lack of shelter, food and water.

18 July: The RPF announces that the war is over, declares a cease-fire and names Pastor Bizimungu as president with Faustin Twagiramungu as prime minister

Related Posts

Rwanda’s Paul Kagame Center of Controversial Election

Ethiopia – Meles receives highest Rwandan medals

Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi received two medals on Saturday from the Government of Rwanda.

One of the medals has been given for Meles’s immense contribution he made in the struggle to topple the dictatorial Derg regime and bring peace, and socio-economic development in Ethiopia.

The other medal was vested in him in recognition of Ethiopia’s contribution in deploying peace keepers to end the civil war in Rwanda.

While marking its 15 years of victory, Rwanda has also given its highest national medal to Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni and former Tanzania President Julius Nyerere.

The leaders received the award for their contribution to halt the Rwandan genocide, according ETV report

Congo examines mass graves to find proof of revenge genocide on Hutus

Hutu Victims

UN DR Congo ‘genocide’ draft report – key excerpts

27 August 2010 BBC Africa

Weapons belonging to a Rwandan Hutu rebel of the FDLR

Among the Hutus who fled to DR Congo in 1994 were many of the militiamen responsible for Rwanda’s genocide

A UN report into massacres of Hutu civilians in DR Congo after the Rwanda’s 1994 genocide has been leaked ahead of its official publication.

Experts say it is the first rigorous investigation – the researchers required two independent sources for each of the 600 incidents documented in their 545-page report – into alleged atrocities committed in eastern DR Congo between 1993 and 2003. Rwanda’s Tutsi-dominated government has dismissed the claims as “rubbish”.

Here are some of the draft report’s key findings:

Continue reading the main story

Start Quote

The systematic use of barriers… enabled them to identify people of Hutu origin by their name or village of origin and thus to eliminate them”

Paragraph 513

512. The systematic attacks, in particular killings and massacres perpetrated against members of the Hutu ethnic group, are described extensively in section I of the report. These attacks resulted in a very large number of victims, probably tens of thousands of members of the Hutu ethnic group, all nationalities combined. In the vast majority of case reported, it was not a question of people killed unintentionally in the course of combat, but people targeted primarily by AFDL [Congolese rebels led by Laurent Kabila, who became president in 1997]/APR [Rwandan army]/FAB [Burundi’s army] forces and executed in their hundreds, often with edged weapons.

The majority of the victims were children, women, elderly people and the sick, who posed no threat to the attacking forces. Numerous serious attacks on the physical or psychological integrity of members of the group were also committed, with a very high number of Hutus shot, raped, burnt or beaten. Very large numbers of victims were forced to flee and travel long distances to escape their pursuers, who were trying to kill them. The hunt lasted for months, resulting in the deaths of an unknown number of people subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading living conditions, without access to food or medication. On several occasions, the humanitarian aid intended for them was deliberately blocked, in particular in Orientale Province, depriving them of assistance essential to their survival.

513. At the time of the incidents covered by this report, the Hutu population in Zaire, including refugees from Rwanda, constituted an ethnic group as defined in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Moreover, as shown previously, the intention to destroy a group in part is sufficient to be classified as a crime of genocide. Finally, the courts have also confirmed that the destruction of a group can be limited to a particular geographical area. It is therefore possible to assert that, even if only a part of the Hutu population in Zaire was targeted and destroyed, it could nonetheless constitute a crime of genocide, if this was the intention of the perpetrators. Finally, several incidents listed also seem to confirm that the numerous attacks were targeted at members of the Hutu ethnic group as such.

Continue reading the main story

Several of the massacres listed were committed regardless of the age or gender of the victims. ”

Paragraph 515

Although, at certain times, the aggressors said they were looking for the criminals responsible for the genocide committed against the Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994, the majority of the incidents reported indicate that the Hutus were targeted as such, with no discrimination between them. The numerous attacks against the Hutus in Zaire, who were not part of the refugees, seem to confirm that it was all Hutus, as such, who were targeted. The crimes committed in particular in Rutshuru (30 October 1996) and Mugogo (18 November 1996), in North Kivu, highlight the specific targeting of the Hutus, since people who were able to persuade the aggressors that they belonged to another ethnic group were released just before the massacres. The systematic use of barriers by the AFDL/APR/FAB, particularly in South Kivu, enabled them to identify people of Hutu origin by their name or village of origin and thus to eliminate them. Hundreds of people of Hutu origin are thus thought to have been arrested at a barrier erected in November 1996 in Ngwenda, in the Rutshuru territory, and subsequently executed by being beaten with sticks in a place called Kabaraza. In South Kivu, AFDL/APR/FAB soldiers erected numerous barriers on the Ruzizi plain to stop Rwandan and Burundian refugees who had been dispersed after their camps had been dismantled.

514. Several incidents listed in this report point to circumstances and facts from which a court could infer the intention to destroy the Hutu ethnic group in the DRC in part, if these were established beyond all reasonable doubt. Firstly, the scale of the crimes and the large number of victims are illustrated by the numerous incidents described above. The extensive use of edged weapons (primarily hammers) and the systematic massacre of survivors, including women and children, after the camps had been taken show that the numerous deaths cannot be attributed to the hazards of war or seen as equating to collateral damage. The systematic nature of the attacks listed against the Hutus also emerges: These attacks took place in each location where refugees had been identified by the AFDL/APR, over a vast area of the country. Particularly in North Kivu and South Kivu but also in other provinces, the massacres often began with a trick by elements of the AFDL/APR, who summoned the victims to meetings on the pretext either of discussing their repatriation to Rwanda in the case of the refugees, or of introducing them to the new authorities in the case of Hutus settled in the region, or of distributing food.

Continue reading the main story

“These “awareness-raising speeches” made in North Kivu also incited the population to look for, kill or help to kill Rwandan Hutu refugees, whom they called “pigs””

Paragraph 515

Afterwards, those present were systematically killed. Cases of this kind were confirmed in the province of North Kivu in Musekera, Rutshuru and Kiringa (October 1996), Mugogo and Kabaraza (November 1996), Hombo, Katoyi, Kausa, Kifuruka, Kinigi, Musenge, Mutiko and Nyakariba (December 1996), Kibumba and Kabizo (April 1997) and Mushangwe (around August 1997); in the province of South Kivu in Rushima and Luberizi (October 1996), Cotonco and Chimanga (November 1996) and Mpwe (February 1997) and on the Shabunda-Kigulube road (February-April 1997); in Orientale Province in Kisangani and Bengamisa (May and June 1997); in Maniema in Kalima (March 1997) and in Équateur in Boende (April 1997). Such acts certainly suggest premeditation and a precise methodology. In the region south of the town of Walikale, in North Kivu (January 1997), Rwandan Hutus were subjected to daily killings in areas already under the control of the AFDL/APR as part of a campaign that seemed to target any Hutus living in the area in question.

515. Several of the massacres listed were committed regardless of the age or gender of the victims. This is particularly true of the crimes committed in Kibumba (October 1996), Mugunga and Osso (November 1996), Hombo and Biriko (December 1996) in the province of North Kivu, Kashusha and Shanje (November 1996) in the province of South Kivu, Tingi-Tingi and Lubutu (March 1997) in Maniema Province, and Boende (April 1997) in Equateur Province, where the vast majority of victims were women and children. Furthermore, no effort was made to make a distinction between Hutus who were members of the ex-FAR/Interahamwe [militia behind Rwanda’s 1994 genocide] and Hutu civilians, whether or not they were refugees.

This tendency to put all Hutus together and “tar them with the same brush” is also illustrated by the declarations made during the “awareness-raising speeches” made by the AFDL/APR in certain places, according to which any Hutu still present in Zaire must necessarily be a perpetrator of genocide, since the “real” refugees had already returned to Rwanda. These “awareness-raising speeches” made in North Kivu also incited the population to look for, kill or help to kill Rwandan Hutu refugees, whom they called “pigs”. This type of language would have been in widespread use during the operations in this region.

516. The massacres in Mbandaka and Wendji, committed on 13 May 1997 in Équateur Province, over 2,000 kilometres west of Rwanda, were the final stage in the hunt for Hutu refugees that had begun in eastern Zaire, in North and South Kivu, in October 1996. Among the refugees were elements of the ex-FAR/Interahamwe, who were disarmed by the local police force as soon as they arrived. In spite of everything, the AFDL/APR opened fire on hundreds of defenceless Hutu refugees, resulting in large numbers of victims.

Continue reading the main story

“It seems possible to infer a specific intention on the part of certain AFDL/APR commanders to partially destroy the Hutus in the DRC, and therefore to commit a crime of genocide”

Paragraph 518

517. The systematic and widespread attacks described in this report, which targeted very large numbers of Rwandan Hutu refugees and members of the Hutu civilian population, resulting in their death, reveal a number of damning elements that, if they were proven before a competent court, could be classified as crimes of genocide. The behaviour of certain elements of the AFDL/APR in respect of the Hutu refugees and Hutu populations settled in Zaire at this time seems to equate to “a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed against that group”, from which a court could even deduce the existence of a genocidal plan. “Whilst the existence of such a plan may contribute to establishing the required genocidal intention, it is nonetheless only an element of proof used to deduce such an intention and not a legal element of genocide.”

It should be noted that certain elements could cause a court to hesitate to decide on the existence of a genocidal plan, such as the fact that as of 15 November 1996, several tens of thousands of Rwandan Hutu refugees, many of whom had survived previous attacks, were repatriated to Rwanda with the help of the AFDL/APR authorities and that hundreds of thousands of Rwandan Hutu refugees were able to return to Rwanda with the consent of the Rwandan authorities prior to the start of the first war. Whilst, in general, the killings did not spare women and children, it should be noted that in some places, at the beginning of the first war, Hutu women and children were in fact separated from the men, and only the men were subsequently killed.

518. Nonetheless, neither the fact that only men were targeted during the massacres, nor the fact that part of the group were allowed to leave the country or that their movement was facilitated for various reasons, are sufficient in themselves to entirely remove the intention of certain people to partially destroy an ethnic group as such. In this respect it seems possible to infer a specific intention on the part of certain AFDL/APR commanders to partially destroy the Hutus in the DRC, and therefore to commit a crime of genocide, based on their conduct, words and the damning circumstances of the acts of violence committed by the men under their command. It will be for a court with proper jurisdiction to rule on this question.

Conclusion

1139. In light of the impunity enjoyed by the perpetrators of serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, and the repetition of crimes within the territory of the DRC, there is a manifest urgency for justice and security service reform. The members of the Mapping Team were able to observe the constant fear on the part of affected populations that history would repeat itself, especially when yesterday’s attackers are returning in positions that enable them to commit new crimes with complete impunity.

H.A.R.R.P considered as New Arm of Armageddon of DOOM’s day as men play God?

Decades have passed since    HAARP has been suspected being responsible and an instrument of Armageddon bringing all recent earth quakes, floods, forest fires, drought that our planet is enduring. While others put the responsibility on the coming Doom’s day effect which will culminate on 2012 at the end of Maya calendar cycle.  The Ecologists put the main culprit being pollution caused by excessive use of fossil fuel all over the world. The religious leaders claimed   a sign of the end of the time as prophesied, when men play as God. These days’ voices have been raised against the installation of HAARP even among some political leaders. Most of the denunciation of the HAARP comes from some people one way or another worked in and around the project.

Get the Flash Player to see the wordTube Media Player.

Get the Flash Player to see the wordTube Media Player.
Get the Flash Player to see the wordTube Media Player.

Get the Flash Player to see the wordTube Media Player.

HAARP The High frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) is a program focused on the study of upper atmospheric and solar-terrestrial physics and Radio Science.

It has been there  since the 1950s to investigating the  fundamental physical principles which govern the earth’s ionosphere.

Brabcheces are found  in Puerto Rico, near the Arecibo Observatory, and the other (known as HIPAS) in Alaska near Fairbanks.

The  European Incoherent Scatter Radar site (EISCAT), a premier ionosphere research facility located in northern Norway near Tromso the offspring of HARRP. It has some reflect factlties all around the earth Jicamarca, Peru; near Moscow, Nizhny Novgorod (“SURA”) and Apatity, Russia; near Kharkov, Ukraine and in Dushanbe, Tadzhikistan.

HAARP in its offical site gives the follwing mains resons of its funtioning:-

  • The Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI), a high power transmitter facility operating in the High Frequency (HF) range. The IRI will be used to temporarily excite a limited area of the ionosphere for scientific study.
  • A sophisticated suite of scientific (or diagnostic) instruments that will be used to observe the physical processes that occur in the excited region.

HAARP is composed of  power, high-frequency (HF) phased array radio transmitter (known as the Ionosphere Research Instrument (IRI), used to stimulate  ionosphere,  geophysical research instruments including an HF ionosonde, ELF and VLF receivers, magnetometers, riometers, a UHF diagnostic radar and optical and infrared spectrometers and cameras which are used to observe the complex natural variations as well as to detect artificial effects produced by the IRI.

HARRP is a  big big  capacitor whcih  only stores and releases electrical energy, without dissipating any. In reality, all capacitors have imperfections within the capacitor’s material that create resistance.

Men through centuries were trying to harness energy  similar to the Ark of  covenant.  Th king of o kings of Ethiopia Menilk the II used the holy Ark to bit the invading Italian troops in 1896 at   the hills of Adwa . The Biblical account relates that during the trip of the Israelites, the Ark was carried by the priests ~2,000 cubits (Numbers 35:5; Joshua 4:5) in advance of the people and their army or host (Num. 4:5-6; 10:33-36; Psalms 68:1; 132:8). When the Ark was borne by priests into the bed of the Jordan, the river was separated, opening a pathway for the whole of the host to pass over (Josh. 3:15-16; 4:7-18). The Ark was borne in a seven day procession around the wall of Jericho by three priests sounding seven trumpets of rams’ horns, the city taken with a shout (Josh. 6:4-20). When carried, the Ark was always wrapped in a veil, in tachash skins (the identity of this animal is uncertain), and a blue cloth, and was carefully concealed, even from the eyes of the Levites who carried it.

HARRP is like a man made Ark which is made to control nature.

According to the its institute  HARRP  to ensure the safety of all flight operations in the vicinity of HAARP, the facility employs an aircraft alert radar (AAR) to automatically shut off appropriate transmissions when aircraft are detected either within or approaching a defined safety zone around the facility. Flight tests are conducted regularly to demonstrate the capability of the HAARP radar to detect even very small targets. Research operations are not conducted unless the AAR is operating satisfactorily.

Related posts

haiti earthquake harrp

CLG says U.S.’s HARRP Program Responsible for the Chili ..

Harrp – The Petition Site

Is HARRP hazardous to our health?

Hacking HARRP with the Faith Frequency

IGAD Manipulated by Melese Zenawie is a force of division and conflict in the horn of Africa

Click for IGAD website

Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD)IGAD  is bragging to  be the   premier regional organization for achieving peace, prosperity and regional integration in the in the Horn of Africa . However, since its creation in 1996 the regions as gone major wars, military   interventions, chronic conflict, starvation,  regional division than integration. Since its creation has been manipulated by Meles Zenawie  for his power and regional position to re-enforce his international  and African Status and cover up his internal misconduct, ethnic cleansing and genocide.

[stream provider=youtube flv=http%3A//www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DKutp3TrciA4 img=x:/img.youtube.com/vi/Kutp3TrciA4/0.jpg embed=false share=false width=450 height=253 dock=true controlbar=none bandwidth=high autostart=false /]


The seven member states of IGAD – Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda – cover an area of 5.2 Million sq. km and have a population of more than 200 Million. The average population growth rate of 2.6 % is one of the highest in the world and nearly half of the population is under 14 years of age.

This uncessful orgnaization took its root in 1983 and 1984, ( Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda)   established an intergovernmental body for development and drought control in their region(IGADD). Eritrea became the seventh member after attaining independence in 1993 and suspended its membership  from the organization April 21, 2007 after a rift with arch-foe Ethiopia at a meeting on Somalia this month threatened to divide the region. The reason given by the Eritrea:-

“It’s a temporary withdrawal. We feel that it’s not responsible to stay in that organisation when decisions are being made that are not legally or morally acceptable.” “The organisation is being manipulated by external forces, a number of repeated and irresponsible resolutions that undermine regional peace and security have been adopted in the guise of IGAD.”

The festering feud between Ethiopia and Eritrea, still bitter over their 1998-2000 border war and locked in what many see as a proxy war in Somalia.

Member StateArea (Sq. Km)Population (m)Annual Population Growth(%)GNI per capita (US$)
Djibouti23,2000.7931.81,010
Eritrea117,6004.43.9170
Ethiopia1,100,00071.31.8160
Kenya580,40034.32.3540
Somalia637,7608.23.3
Sudan2,500,00036.22.0640
Uganda241,00028.83.5280
Total5,199,900184Average 2.6

The  non realized objectives of IGAD were:-

  • Promote joint development strategies and gradually harmonize macro-economic policies and programmes in the social, technological and scientific fields;
  • Harmonize policies with regard to trade, customs, transport, communications, agriculture, and natural resources, and promote free movement of goods, services, and people within the region.
  • Create an enabling environment for foreign, cross-border and domestic trade and investment;
  • Achieve regional food security and encourage and assist efforts of Member States to collectively combat drought and other natural and man-made disatsters and their natural consequences;
  • Initiate and promote programmes and projects to achieve regional food security and sustainable development of natural resources and environment protection, and encourage and assist efforts of Member States to collectively combat drought and other natural and man-made disasters and their consequences;
  • Develop and improve a coordinated and complementary infrastructure, in the areas of transport, telecommunications and energy in the region;
  • Promote peace and stability in the region and create mechanisms within the region for the prevention, management and resolution of inter-State and intra-State conflicts through dialogue;
  • Mobilize resources for the implementation of emergency, short-term, medium-term and long-term programmes within the framework of regional cooperation;
  • Promote and realize the objectives of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and the African Economic Community;
  • Facilitate, promote and strengthen cooperation in research development and application in science and technology

Africa: Communique of the 15th Extraordinary Session of the IGAD Assembly of Heads of State thumbnail

Communique of the 15th Extraordinary Session of the IGAD Assembly of Heads of State

The Summit:

Having taken note of the decisions and recommendations made by the 36th Extra-ordinary Session of the IGAD Council of Ministers as reflected in their Communiqué of 15th June 2010,

Having taken note of the report of the IGAD military expert’s mission to Mogadishu,

Considering the brief by the President of the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia and his appeal for urgent support and assistance to build the capacity of the TFG security forces,

Recalling the previous decisions of the IGAD Assembly of Heads of State and Government and the Council of Ministers on Somalia,

1. Notes with serious concern the deteriorating security situation in Somalia which poses serious threat to the peace, security and stability to the people and TFG of Somalia , the region and the international community ;

2. Reiterates the commitment and resolve of IGAD member states to give unswerving support and assistance to the TFG in its struggle against extremist and terrorist groups;

3. Underlines that the conflict in Somalia is not a conflict among the Somalis but between the people of Somalia and international terrorist groups;

4. Emphasizes the need for an urgent and robust response by international community led by the UN Security Council, to arrest the escalating danger facing Somalia and the sub-Region and reiterates its previous call to the UN to convert AMISOM into a UN peace keeping operation without delay;

5. Decides that a sustainable and reliable funding mechanism to be established and managed jointly by AMISOM, UNPOS, IGAD and the TFG for sustainment of the security forces upon development and deployment in Somalia;

6. Calls upon the African Union to relocate as soon as possible the civilian and police components of AMISOM to Mogadishu;

7. Regrets that the approved level of AMISOM troops has not been achieved thus far; and decides to deploy 2000 peacekeepers under AMISOM to Somalia immediately; and further calls upon the AU Commission to mobilize the necessary resources, logistics and equipment for the deployment;

8. Decides to work with all parties including AMISOM and UN Security Council to raise 20,000 troops to be deployed throughout the country. In this regard, Summit Embraces the need to mobilize Somali forces internally with possible intervention by neighboring countries including approaching the East African Community (EAC) and empower them with resources and equipment;

9. Endorses the recommendations of the military mission to Somalia as amended; Directs the Chiefs of Defense Staff of IGAD Member States to convene an urgent meeting and submit to the AU Commission an action plan to deploy 2000 peace keepers to Somalia to enable AMISOM to reach the authorized strength of 8100, and to review and implement, as appropriate, the recommendations made by the IGAD Military Mission to Somalia;

10. Directs the Chairperson of the Council of Ministers and IGAD Secretariat to make the necessary arrangement for the convening of the meeting of the IGAD chiefs of defense staff;

11. Decides to render support to the TFG Security institutions by providing inter alia training of troops and trainers , establishment of joint command and providing experts;

12. Directs IGAD Secretariat to strengthen its office in Mogadishu within 15 days and Calls upon AMISOM, UNPOS and IGAD to establish in Mogadishu an operational level coordination mechanism to strengthen and harmonize their support to the TFG in the areas of training, establishment of command and control structure;

13. Express appreciation to the partner Countries and organizations that are currently providing financial, material and technical assistance to the TFG andCalls upon them to enhance and sustain their support;

14. Welcomes the Agreement signed between the TFG and Ahlu  Sunna Wal Jamma’a on 15 March 2010 in Addis Ababa and encourages the parties to realize the full implementation of the Agreement;

15. Encouraged by the commitment of the leadership of the TFG and urgesTransitional Federal Institutions (TFIs) to enhance their cohesion and unity in the face of the enormous challenges that Somalia is facing currently and in order to make progress in the accomplishment of the numerous tasks envisaged for the transitional period;

16. Calls upon the Chairperson of AUC to appoint an eminent person to lead the campaign for peace in Somalia. The eminent person shall be at the apex of a coordinating mechanism towards reconstitution and building the State of Somalia and to raise the profile of the country internationally;

17. Calls upon the international community to continue assisting refugees, internally displaced persons and victims of violence.

18. Affirms that the Djibouti process remains the sole basis for the Somalia peace and reconciliation and Rejects the proliferation of initiatives inimical to the swift resolution of the crisis in Somalia; Urges the TFG to continue the efforts it has been making to broaden its base while ensuring that the process is protected from the threat posed by extremists whose major effort includes the dismantling of the Djibouti process;

19. Calls upon AU Member states that have not contributed troops to render financial and material support to Somalia;

20. Having listened to a brief by H.E. Ismael Omar Guelleh, the President of the Republic of Djibouti on the mediation efforts by Qatar between Djibouti and Eritrea, decides to encourage the positive developments and also underscore the necessity for Eritrea to carry out all its obligations under the UN Security Council Resolution 1907 (2009).

21. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

Issued this 5th day of July, 2010, in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

[stream provider=youtube flv=http%3A//www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DpN_idpnpobU img=x:/img.youtube.com/vi/pN_idpnpobU/0.jpg embed=false share=false width=450 height=253 dock=true controlbar=none bandwidth=high autostart=false /]

Urgent East African Summit Discuses Somalia’s Security

[stream provider=youtube flv=http%3A//www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DsCNZLmi7VQ8 img=x:/img.youtube.com/vi/sCNZLmi7VQ8/0.jpg embed=false share=false width=450 height=253 dock=true controlbar=none bandwidth=high autostart=false /]

—————

[stream provider=youtube flv=http%3A//www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D7mqQbDP8l2Q img=x:/img.youtube.com/vi/7mqQbDP8l2Q/0.jpg embed=false share=false width=450 height=253 dock=true controlbar=none bandwidth=high autostart=false /]

Mo Ibrahim won a prize but failed to influence the African Dinosaurs let the power go

Mo Ibrahim rejected the African leaders  for second year  worthy of  any  prize, 2009 & 2010.  It  easier  to  make himself  Laureate than to find one from the African Dinosaurs. He was awarded the European Mercator Fund’s Raymond Georis Prize for Innovative Philanthropy, at the closing plenary of 21st EFC Annual General Assembly and Conference on 4 June  2010.

“Whether there is a winner or not, the purpose of the Foundation is to challenge those in Africa and across the world to debate what constitutes excellence in leadership.” (Mo)

Mo understood the true nature of African leadership and their  Banana Republics.  May 2010, the African leaders  acclamed the worst dictator  Melese Zenawie   has  claimed winning an election  with  a shameful  sliding victory of 99.6%. These  African leaders do not deserve any kind of prize but that of non governeace and treachery, if there is one.   The African leaders  are not even ashmed to see the froud commited   flagrantely in the capital of African Unity Addis Ababa ,  rather prefer to  endorse such a sham election.

“The Board respects the decision of the Prize Committee not to select a winner for the 2010 prize. The Prize Committee, which is independent from the Board, is a unique repository of experience and expertise.”

Melese Zenawie  of Ethiopia   and Beshir of  Sudan lost the the occasion to win the prize and prefer  the power  seat .  It seems Mo  is trying in vain to persuade the african dictators to let the power go  without success.

Melee & Beshir merit ike their model  Charles  Taylor  to visit the ICC than to be awarded any kind of Prize or lulled to leave power by Mo’s soft   methodology.

Mo would have found  a lot of candidate if  his foundation  change  its role and start giving  prize for the African dictators  longevity in powers.  Meles and  Mo’s  compatriot  Beshir  would have been the first to win, that                       ” would have opened”  Mo many doors around the continent’s corrupted regimes.


httpvhd://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-ab1CcdQrI

httpvhd://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmWhOW9EkGI

httpvhd://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOuIyK4b-Vc

African leadership prize withheld

Ibrahim Foundation

Mo Ibrahim African leadership prize withheld again

BBC  14 June 2010

The world’s most valuable individual prize is not being awarded for a second year because no-one is deemed worthy of winning it.

Sudanese businessman Mo Ibrahim set up the $5m (£3m) prize for African ex-leaders to encourage good governance on the continent.Mo Ibrahim

“The standards set for the prize-winner are high,” he said, adding that no new candidates had emerged since last year.

Winners must have been democratically elected and agreed to leave office.

South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki, Nigeria’s Olusegun Obasanjo and Ghana’s John Kufuor are among those who qualified for last year’s prize after stepping down in the previous three years.

“It is likely that there will be years when no prize is awarded. In the current year, no new candidates emerged,” said a statement from the Mo Ibrahim Foundation.

The winners receive $5m over 10 years, and then $200,000 a year for life.

Mr Ibrahim argues that the prize is needed because many leaders of sub-Saharan African countries come from poor backgrounds and are tempted to hang on to power for fear that poverty is what awaits them when they give up the levers of power.

Botswana’s former President Festus Mogae won the prize in 2008 after two terms at the helm of one of Africa’s least corrupt and most prosperous nations.

The inaugural prize was given to Joaquim Chissano, Mozambique’s former president, who has since acted as a mediator in several

The Africom US’s Military Support for Africa …Why?

The US  is forced to put its   new Africa Command in Germany for now,only  Liberia, offered to host it.

Most African countries are scared considering it as a new colonization of the US by militarization the continent, since it has been only  half a century they came out of brutal colonization.

The us military command was created to unite responsibilities shared by three other US regional commands.

According to the US the key aim of Africom was to build the capacity of African countries for security and peacekeeping. theAfricans doubt the  US intentions as they felt a lose of the hard won national sovereignty.

The AFRICOM Crest. Click for high-res version.

Gen William Ward - Africom commander

Gen William Ward Head of Africom

I believe that the U.S. military can be an effective long-term partner in Africa, because we share the same goal of an Africa that is secure, stable and developed in ways meaningful to its people and our global society. Our men and women in uniform bring capabilities to help the Africans achieve their security goals while demonstrating how pride in ones service can make a difference in how the people of a nation feel towards their military, their government, and each other especially in places where ethnic tensions remain a factor.

General Kip Ward , Commander, United States Africa Command


Modern Ghana

SCRATs: AFRICOM after the Human Terrain System
Modern Ghana
Research experience in North Africa, East Africa/Horn of Africa, Central Africa, or West Africa is desirable. The position requires travel within the US and 

The People of Africa Reject AFRICOM – A U.S. Bid for Military 

FACT SHEET: United States Africa Command

U.S. Civil Affairs Assist Pemba with VETCAP U.S. Navy Maritime Civil Affairs team 202 worked side-by-side with the 353rd Functional Specialty (FxSp) Team and Pemba livestock officers to vaccinate and treat more than 4,000 animals during a veterinary civic action project (VETCAP) on Pemba Island, Tanzania. May 3-14, 2010. All animals were given…

U.S. Army sponsors medical exchange with Djibouti military

Opening ceremony in Northern Uganda Marks Start to Humanitarian Exercise

FACT SHEET: U.S. Humanitarian Aid to Somalia

Pentagon Moves For More Clandestine Operations

httpvhd://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOvP9036sHU

US militarisation: The tragedy of Somalia

By Explo Nani-Kofi

Saturday, May 29, 2010

As the US Africa Command (AFRICOM) force becomes ever more active in Somalia, questions must be raised as to the intentions of this militarised organisation, writes Explo Nani-Kofi. Nani-Kofi stresses that the African continent grows ever more vulnerable to a maturing breed of neocolonial occupation based on US-led proxy wars.

When Barack Obama was elected president of the US, it was supposed to be the end of the bad old days of George W. Bush. But in Somalia, the ‘war on terror’ continues.

March this year saw the start of a new US operation in support of the transitional government in Somalia.

According to the New York Times, American advisors had spent the last several months training Somali forces to be deployed in the offensive against factions of the Union of Islamic Courts movement, and the US had provided ‘covert training to Somali intelligence officers, logistical support to the peacekeepers, fuel for the maneuvers, surveillance information about insurgent positions and money for bullets and guns’.

This was something of a covert operation from the US point of view. A US official, who told the paper ‘what you’re likely to see is air strikes and Special Ops moving in, hitting and getting out’, said he was not allowed to speak publicly about it.

The Somali government, however, was happy to boast of US involvement. General Mohamed Gelle Kahiye, the new chief of staff of the armed forces, said of a military surveillance plane overhead, ‘It’s the Americans. They’re helping us.’

On 2 May, explosions in a mosque in Mogadishu’s Bakara market, a stronghold of the US-targeted Al Shabaab group, killed 45 people and triggered fighting between a pro-government militia and Al Shabaab and Hizbal al Islam, both factions of the Union of Islamic Courts movement. It’s not clear who actually set off the explosions, but it is beginning to seem that Somalia could be the US Africa Command’s (AFRICOM) first overt war.

The Obama administration’s 2011 budget request for security assistance programmes in Africa includes $38 million for arms sales to African states, $21 million for training African officers and $24 million for anti-terrorism programmes. This is in addition to the 40 tonnes of arms and ammunition supplied to the Somali transitional government in 2009, and military aid to Ethiopia, which fronted for the US in the fight against the Union of Islamic Courts in 2006. AFRICOM has now taken over US security assistance programmes with Mali, Niger, Chad and Senegal, and the Defense Department is now considering forming a 1,000-strong marine rapid deployment force for Africa. Although AFRICOM gives the impression it is not a combat force, it looks as if this may change.

The justification for US involvement in Somalia is ‘Islamic extremism’. Al Shabaab is on the US list of terrorist organisations as a supposed part of al-Qaeda. On 14 March, General William (‘Kip’) Ward, commander of AFRICOM, singled out Somalia in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee as the east African country most ‘threatened by terrorists’, while Senator Carl Levin stated that ‘al Qaeda and violent extremists who share their ideology are not just located in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region but in places like Somalia, Mali, Nigeria and Niger’. Kip Ward also spoke of support for the Somali government, which is being fought against by radical Islamist groups, as a responsibility that the US has to take up. This means that there is no separation between the US–UK presence in Afghanistan and AFRICOM’s operations in Somalia and other parts of Africa.

Writing in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on 10 March, the last ambassador of the United States to Somalia (1994–95), Daniel H. Simpson, posed the question ‘Why, apart from the only lightly documented charge of Islamic extremism among the Shabaab, is the United States reengaging in Somalia at this time?’ He provided the answer himself: ‘Part of the reason is because the United States has its only base in Africa up the coast from Mogadishu, in Djibouti, the former French Somaliland. The US Africa Command was established there in 2008, and, absent the willingness of other African countries to host it, the base in Djibouti became the headquarters for US troops and fighter bombers in Africa.’

AFRICOM, responsible for US military operations for the whole of the African continent except Egypt, was established in October 2008, but the idea goes back to the beginning of the decade, when the US National Intelligence Council estimated that the US will buy 25 per cent of its oil from Africa by 2015. Oil and natural gas seems to always sit nicely with this so-called war on terror.

The case of Somalia epitomises the proxy war situation in Africa and also smashes some of the myths around why African countries are in the situation they are. It’s sometimes argued that the different languages and tribes in many African countries are the cause of their problems. However, Somalia is one country with one language and one dominant religion, so by that reasoning it should have more internal harmony than its neighbours. The explanation for its problems lies in the history of colonialism and exploitation by Western powers. The breakdown of national cohesion in Somalia and the civil war in 1988, since when the country has been ungovernable from Mogadishu, was caused by its use in the Cold War and specifically by President Siad Barre’s decision to seek alliances with the US and apartheid South Africa against Soviet Union-backed Ethiopia. Subsequent international interventions, like the UN force in 1992 and the Ethiopian US-backed invasion in 2006 have been more about occupation than mediation.

The US proxy war in Africa is a mechanism to re-colonise the continent and extend the boundaries of the war on terror. It’s time to mobilise against it. To support the campaign against AFRICOM and the proxy situation in Africa, check the Sons and daughters of Africa Movement Facebook page, coordinated in Europe by Agnes Munyi-Vanselow and Explo Nani-Kofi of KILOMBO – Campaigning Against Proxy War Situation in Africa and AFRICOM. The latter is affiliated with the Stop the War Coalition in the UK.
httpvhd://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDGOMY4gNVQ

AFRICOM’s First War: U.S. Directs Large-Scale Offensive In Somalia

By Rick Rozoff

Wednesday, Mar 17, 2010

“The United States Africa Command, also known as AFRICOM, is a new U.S. military headquarters devoted only to Africa. It is one of the U.S. Defense Department’s six regional headquarters. Command officials will work with African partners to achieve a more stable environment in which political and economic growth can take place.”(Text & photo – U.S. Department of Defense website)

Over 43 people have been killed in the Somali capital of Mogadishu in the past two days in fighting between Shabab (al-Shabaab) insurgent forces, who on March 10 advanced to within one mile of the nation’s presidential palace, and troops of the U.S.-backed Transitional Federal Government. The fighting has just begun.

The last ambassador of the United States to Somalia (1994-1995), Daniel H. Simpson, penned a column for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on March 10 in which which he posed the question “why, apart from the only lightly documented charge of Islamic extremism among the Shabab, is the United States reengaging in Somalia at this time?”

He answered it in stating “Part of the reason is because the United States has its only base in Africa up the coast from Mogadishu, in Djibouti, the former French Somaliland. The U.S. Africa Command was established there in 2008, and, absent the willingness of other African countries to host it, the base in Djibouti became the headquarters for U.S. troops and fighter bombers in Africa.

“Flush with money, in spite of the expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Department of Defense obviously feels itself in a position to undertake military action in Africa, in Somalia.”1

Fulfilling its appointed role, the New York Times leaked U.S. military plans for the current offensive in Somalia on March 5 in a report titled “U.S. Aiding Somalia in Its Plan to Retake Its Capital.” (Note that the Transitional Federal Government is presented as Somalia itself and Mogadishu as its capital.)

The tone of the feature was of course one of approval and endorsement of the Pentagon’s rationale for directly intervening in Somalia at a level not seen since 1993 and support for proxy actions last witnessed with the invasion by Ethiopia in 2006. The report began with a description of a military surveillance plane circling over the Somali capital and a quote from the new chief of staff of the nation’s armed forces, General Mohamed Gelle Kahiye: “It’s the Americans. They’re helping us.”

Afterward “An American official in Washington, who said he was not authorized to speak publicly” – a hallmark of the American free press – was, if not identified, quoted as maintaining that U.S. covert operations were planned if not already underway and “What you’re likely to see is airstrikes and Special Ops moving in, hitting and getting out.”2

The New York Times also provided background information regarding the current offensive:

“Over the past several months, American advisers have helped supervise the training of the Somali forces to be deployed in the offensive….The Americans have provided covert training to Somali intelligence officers, logistical support to the peacekeepers, fuel for the maneuvers, surveillance information about insurgent positions and money for bullets and guns.”3

Four days later General William (“Kip”) Ward, commander of United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

In his introductory remarks the chairman of the committee, Senator Carl Levin, reinforced recent American attempts to expand the scope of the deepening Afghanistan-Pakistan war, the deadliest and lengthiest in the world, to the west and south in stating that “al Qaeda and violent extremists who share their ideology are not just located in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region but in places like Somalia, Mali, Nigeria and Niger.”4

In his formal report Ward pursued a similar tact and expanded the Pentagon’s “counter-terrorism” (CT) area of responsibility yet further from South Asia: “U.S. Africa Command has focused the majority of its CT capacity building activities in East Africa on Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, and Uganda, which – aside from Somalia – are the countries directly threatened by terrorists.”5

He also spoke of the current offensive by “the transition government to reclaim parts of Mogadishu,” stating “I think it’s something that we would look to do and support.”6

Senator Levin and General Ward included eight African nations in the broader Afghan war category of Operation Enduring Freedom, countries from the far northeast of the continent (the Horn of Africa) to the far west (the oil-rich Gulf of Guinea). The U.S. military has already been involved in counterinsurgency operations in Mali and Niger against ethnic Tuareg rebels, who have no conceivable ties to al-Qaeda, not that one would know that from Levin’s comments.

“In an exercise last month near Bamako, Mali, American troops helped soldiers from Mali and Senegal in West Africa learn to guard their borders against infiltration by Islamic militants.” (The New York Times, December 12, 2008.)

In between South Asia and Africa lies Yemen on the Arabian Peninsula. The New York Times report cited earlier reminded readers that “The United States is increasingly concerned about the link between Somalia and Yemen.” Indeed as Levin’s comments quoted above establish, Washington (along with its NATO allies) is forging an expanded war front from Afghanistan and Pakistan to Yemen and into Africa.7

That extension of the South Asia war has not gone unobserved in world capitals, and earlier this year Russian political analyst Andrei Fedyashin commented: “Adding up all four fronts – if the United States ventured an attack on Yemen and Somalia – America would have to invade a territory equal to three-fourths of Western Europe; and it is hardly strong enough for that.”8

Strong enough or not, that is just what the White House and the Pentagon are doing. The only other objection that can be raised to the above author’s description is that it too severely narrows the intended battlefront.

In the past six months Somali troops have been sent to Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda for combat training and “most are now back in the capital, waiting to fight.”

In addition, “There are also about 5,000 Ugandan and Burundian peacekeepers, with 1,700 more on their way, and they are expected to play a vital role in backing up advancing Somali forces.”9

Last October the U.S. led ten days of military exercises in Uganda – Natural Fire 10 – with 450 American troops and over 550 from Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. The U.S. soldiers were deployed from Camp Lemonier (Lemonnier) in Djibouti, home to the Pentagon’s Joint Task Force/Horn of Africa and over 2,000 U.S. forces. The de facto headquarters of AFRICOM.

At the time of the maneuvers a major Ugandan newspaper wrote that they were “geared towards the formation of the first Joint East African Military Force.”10

In addition to using such a multinational regional force in Somalia, the U.S. can also deploy it against Uganda’s Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) rebels in Uganda, Congo and Sudan, and could even employ it against Eritrea, Zimbabwe and Sudan, along with Somalia the only nations on the African continent not to some degree enmeshed in military partnerships with Washington and NATO. (Libya has participated in NATO naval exercises and South Africa has hosted the bloc’s warships.)11

Earlier this month the Kenyan newspaper The East African divulged that “American legislators are pushing for a law that will see another phase of military action to apprehend Lord’s Resistance Army rebels.”

The news source added that the LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Bill adopted by the U.S. Congress last year “requires the US government to develop a new multifaceted strategy” and as such the new bill under consideration “will not be the first time the US government is providing support to the Uganda army in fighting the LRA.

“The US has been backing the UPDF [Uganda People’s Defence Force] with logistics and training to fight the rebel group.”12

Last month it was announced that the U.S. Africa Command has dispatched special forces to train 1,000 Congolese troops in the north and east of their nation, where Congo borders Uganda.

Former U.S. diplomat Daniel Simpson was quoted above as to what in part is Washington’s motive in pursuing a new war in and around Somalia: To test out AFRICOM ground and air forces in Djibouti for direct military action on the continent.

A United Press International report of March 10, placed under energy news, offered another explanation. In a feature titled “East Africa is next hot oil zone,” the news agency disclosed that “East Africa is emerging as the next oil boom following a big strike in Uganda’s Lake Albert Basin. Other oil and natural gas reserves have been found in Tanzania and Mozambique and exploration is under way in Ethiopia and even war-torn Somalia.”

Emerging energy interests in Uganda’s Lake Albert Basin.

The region is, in the words of the Western chief executive officer of an oil prospecting firm, “the last real high-potential area in the world that hasn’t been fully explored.”13

The article added:

“The discovery at Lake Albert, in the center of Africa between Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, is estimated to contain the equivalent of several billion barrels of oil. It is likely to be the biggest onshore field found south of the Sahara Desert in two decades.”

It also spoke of “a vast 135,000-square-mile territory in landlocked Ethiopia that is believed to contain sizable reserves of oil. It is estimated to hold 4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas as well.”

And, more pertinent to the Horn of Africa:

“A 1993 study by Petroconsultants of Geneva concluded that Somalia has two of the most potentially interesting hydrocarbon-yielding basins in the entire region – one in the central Mudugh region, the other in the Gulf of Aden. More recent analyses indicate that Somalia could have reserves of up to 10 billion barrels.”10

Washington’s North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies are also deeply involved in the militarization of East Africa.

On March 10 NATO extended its naval operation in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia, Ocean Shield, to the end of 2012, an unprecedentedly long 33-month extension. On March 12 “Standing NATO Maritime Group 2 will take over missions from Standing NATO Maritime Group 1 for the four-month assignment. The change will increase NATO’s contribution from four ships to five ships….”15

At the same hearings of the Senate Armed Services Committee that AFRICOM commander William Ward addressed, NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, America’s Admiral James Stavridis, “noted that 100,000 NATO troops are involved in expeditionary operations on three continents, including operations in Afghanistan, off the coast of Africa, and in Bosnia.” (Evidently Kosovo was meant for Bosnia.)

Stavridis, who is concurrently top military chief of U.S. European Command, said “The nature of threats in this 21st century [is] going to demand more than just sitting behind our borders.”16

He also said he finds “Iran alarming in any number of dimensions,” specifically mentioning alleged “state-sponsored terrorism, nuclear proliferation and political outreach into Latin America.”17

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen recently returned from Jordan and the Persian Gulf state of Bahrain where he pressured both nations to support the war in Afghanistan and Alliance naval operations.

“NATO’s top official said [on March 9] that he has asked Jordan and Bahrain to contribute to alliance naval operations fighting terrorism and piracy in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Gulf of Aden, as he ended a visit to the two countries. NATO is keen to improve cooperation with Arab and Muslim states, seeing them as important allies for a number of missions, including the all-important deployment in Afghanistan.”18

Regarding the Western military bloc’s almost nine-year Operation Active Endeavor in the entire Mediterranean Sea and its Operation Ocean Shield in the Gulf of Aden, Rasmussen said, “We would very much like to strengthen cooperation (with Bahrain and Jordan) within these operations.”19

While in Jordan he was strengthening military ties with NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue partnership – Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia – and in Bahrain firming up the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative aimed at the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates have military personnel serving under NATO in Afghanistan.

In late February a delegation of the 53-nation African Union (AU) visited NATO’s Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe in Mons, Belgium.

“NATO continues to support the AU mission in Somalia (AMISOM) through the provision of strategic sea- and air-lift for AMISOM Troop Contributing Nations on request. The last airlift support occurred in June 2008 when NATO transported a battalion of Burundian peacekeepers to Mogadishu.”21

On March 10 AMISON deployed tanks to prevent the capture of the Somali presidential palace by rebels.

The North Atlantic military bloc, which in recent years has conducted large-scale exercises in West Africa and inaugurated its international Response Force in Cape Verde in 2006, also supports “the operationalisation of the African Standby Force – the African Union’s vision for a continental, on-call security apparatus similar to the NATO Response Force.”22

In May the European Union, whose membership largely overlaps with that of NATO and which is engaged in intense integration with the military bloc on a global scale22 will begin training 2,000 Somali troops in Uganda.

Brigadier General Thierry Caspar-Fille-Lambie, commanding officer of French armed forces in Djibouti, said “the Somali troops will be trained with the necessary military skills to help pacify and stabilize the volatile country.”

He issued that statement “at the closing ceremony of four-week French operational training of 1,700 Ugandan troops to be deployed” to Somalia in May. The French ambassador to Uganda said “The EU troops shall work in close collaboration with UPDF to train Somali troops.”23

The 2,000 soldiers to be trained by the EU will represent a full third of a projected 6,000-troop Somali army.

The U.S.-NATO-EU global triad plans an even larger collective military role in the new scramble for Africa. On March 4 and 5 a delegation from AFRICOM met with European Union officials in Brussels “seeking EU cooperation in Africa,” specifically in “areas where cooperation could be possible, notably with the soon-to-be-launched EU mission to train Somali troops.”24

Tony Holmes, AFRICOM’s deputy to the commander for civil-military activities, said “Somalia, that’s an area where we’re going to be doing a lot more, the European Union is already doing a lot and will be doing more….

“Somalia is very important for us. The European Union is involved in training Somalis in Uganda and that’s something we might be able to work closely with to support.”

The AFRICOM delegation, including Major-General Richard Sherlock, director of strategy, plans and programs, also discussed “counter-terrorism cooperation with the EU in the Sahel region, notably in Mauritania, Mali and Niger….”25

In late January the chairman of NATO’s Military Committee, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola, said “that the Alliance is in discussion with a Gulf state to deploy AWACS planes for a reconnaissance mission over Afghanistan in support of its ISAF mission and also for anti-piracy off Somalia.”26

To demonstrate that NATO’s anti-piracy operation off the coast of Somalia has other designs than the one acknowledged, early this year a NATO spokesman announced that the bloc’s naval contingent in the Gulf of Aden “now has an additional task” to intervene against a fictional deployment of Somali fighters across the Gulf to Yemen.

The spokesman, Jacqui Sheriff, said “NATO warships will be on the lookout for anything suspicious.”27

As though Somali al-Shabaab fighters have nothing else to do as the U.S. is engineering an all-out assault on them in their homeland.

Five days after the New York Times feature detailed American war plans in Somalia, the Washington Times followed up on and added to that report.

U.S. operations are “likely to be the most overt demonstration of U.S. military backing since the ill-fated Operation Restore Hope of 1992….”

“Unmanned U.S. surveillance aircraft have been seen circling over Mogadishu in recent days, apparently pinpointing insurgent positions as the TFG [Transitional Federal Government] marshals its forces. U.S. Army advisers have been helping train the TFG’s forces, which have been largely equipped with millions of dollars’ worth of U.S. arms airlifted into Mogadishu over the last few weeks.”

The newspaper report further stated: “It’s not clear when the offensive will start. The word on the street is sometime in the next few weeks….”

The campaign has already begun.

“After securing Mogadishu, the offensive, supported by militias allied with the government, for now, at least, is likely to continue against al-Shebab in the countryside west and south toward the border with Kenya.”28

The People of Africa Reject AFRICOM – A U.S. Bid for Military Dominance (Updated) ( 0)

Buganda Revolution in Uganda



His Majesty Ronald Muwenda Mutebi II 36th King of Buganda

In Ethiopia the Historical  over  thousand of  years Zege Church burned recently  by the regime No body moved a finger. The Great Buganda people has just declared revolution while the Ethiopians are sleeping . The Ethiopians must learn from Uganda and defend their cultural identity.  Imagine a Mosque is just touched what will happen? Where is the justice…? Where are the defender of international cultural Identity ? Where are the  so called Christan world ?  Specially The orthodox World  Russia ,  Greek 8 Eastern Churhes   etc… Where are our brothers the  Muslims defender of a true faith no word in their site about this great church ? Where is our ecumenism.  Where is UNESCO in Ethiopia ?

The Buganda kings like  Toree’s  kings claim their descendants from Ethiopian Kings they gave the name to the country what is called today  the post colonial Uganda. Uganda is off time konwn as the  Perle of Africa.

Buganda is a kingdom located on Lake Victoria; Over time it expanded by means of conquest; in the 19th century it covered a large part of what is Uganda today, including the site which was to become Uganda’s capital, Kampala. It has an old relation with the Abyssinian kingdom. it was interpreted by the Scramble of Africa  and the coming of the European powers in the region.

In the 19th century, Buganda was visited by western travelers : J.H. SPEKE (1862), HENRY MORTON STANLEY (1876). Their reports picture a state of considerable size and authority, the capital at LUBAGA HILL a town of 40,000, the armed forces consisting of 125,000 troops and a ‘navy’ of 230 war canoes.
Anglican missionaries arrived in 1877; Catholic missionaries in 1879; soon, protestant (Anglican), catholic and islamic groups intrigued against each other at Buganda’s court. Clashes between rival factions resulted in massacres; as political leaders frequently changed, so did the victimized communities; in 1885, Kabaka Mwanga ordered the execution of 1 Anglican missionary and of 30 Catholic converts..

Brief Description

The Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi constitute a site embracing almost 30 ha of hillside within Kampala district. Most of the site is agricultural, farmed by traditional methods. At its core on the hilltop is the former palace of the Kabakas of Buganda, built in 1882 and converted into the royal burial ground in 1884. Four royal tombs now lie within the Muzibu Azaala Mpanga, the main building, which is circular and surmounted by a dome. It is a major example of an architectural achievement in organic materials, principally wood, thatch, reed, wattle and daub. The site’s main significance lies, however, in its intangible values of belief, spirituality, continuity and identity.

The Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi constitute a site embracing almost 30 ha of hillside within Kampala district. Most of the site is agricultural, farmed by traditional methods. At its core on the hilltop is the former palace of the Kabakas of Buganda, built in 1882 and converted into the royal burial ground in 1884. Four royal tombs now lie within the Muzibu Azaala Mpanga, the main building, which is circular and surmounted by a dome. It is a major example of an architectural achievement in organic materials, principally wood, thatch, reed, wattle and daub. The site’s main significance lies, however, in its intangible values of belief, spirituality, continuity and identity.


Njagala-Kasayi or Kasaba’s wife’s hut in the main courtyard | Sébastien Moriset © UNESCO
Date of Inscription: 2001
Criteria: (i)(iii)(iv)(vi)
Property : 26.8000 ha
Kampala District
N0 20 55 E32 33 5
Ref: 1022

Brief Description

Statement of Significance

Criterion i The Kasubi Tombs site is a masterpiece of human creativity both in its conception and its execution. Criterion iii The Kasubi Tombs site bears eloquent witness to the living cultural traditions of the Baganda. Criterion iv The spatial organization of the Kasubi Tombs site represents the best extant example of a Baganda palace/architectural ensemble. Built in the finest traditions of Ganda architecture and palace design, it reflects technical achievements developed over many centuries. Criterion vi The built and natural elements of the Kasubi Tombs site are charged with historical, traditional, and spiritual values. It is a major spiritual centre for the Baganda and is the most active religious place in the kingdom.

Thousands of people in Uganda belonging to the Baganda kingdom have held a riot at the tombs of their late kings, which caught fire last night.

The grass thatched building which contained the five tombs of late kings, all the kings to have ruled Buganda kingdom in the last 100 years, caught fire last night. According to a police officer at a police post near the tombs, Chris Sali, the tombs caught fire at 8.30 but there are different versions about the cause of fire.

“Some people say that they saw someone setting fire on the tombs. They say he fled in a vehicle. Others say that young men who smoke opium near the tombs were responsible for setting the fire on the tombs,” Sali said.

Meanwhile, some people in the Buganda kingdom have accused the Ugandan government of setting the fire on the tombs. The government has vehemently denied the allegations.

Thousands of angry people stormed the tombs after the fire and started mourning. They fought with the police who had been deployed to contain law and order. Four people have been admitted to hospital (Mulago) in Kampala after having sustained severe injuries.



President Museveni

The angry mob blocked Uganda’s president, Yoweri Kaguta Museveni from visiting the tombs. The President later canceled his visit.

Although President Yoweri Museveni restored Ugandan Kingdoms in 1993 — albeit establishing them as non-political cultural institutions — after they were abolished in 1967 by President Obote, the Baganda believe that the President has tried to limit the influence of the Buganda Kabaka (King).

Last September, clashes erupted in the Ugandan capital, Kampala, following a planned visit by King Ronald Muwenda Mutebi of the Buganda kingdom to the central district of Kayunga. About 20 people were killed.

Kayunga, which is part of the Buganda kingdom, is believed to be inhabited by mostly non-Baganda. The riots were sparked when the minority community in the largely Buganda populated area opposed the King’s trip.

The Kayungas who opposed the visit of the King said they had seceded from the Buganda Kingdom, while insisting that the Kabaka’s visit was politically motivated. A detail that is prohibited by the 1993 deal that restored the kingdoms.

Constitutional powers

The Baganda have been advocating for constitutional powers for Kings through the restoration of a federal administration that would formally recognize the political power of their King.

Buganda is the largest and most politically powerful kingdom with about 20 per cent of the total Ugandan population and constituting the largest single ethnic group in the country.

The Kingdom is strategically located in the central region along the shores of Lake Victoria and houses the nation’s capital, Kampala.

The Baganda have an estimated population of about five million people.

During the colonial era, Buganda became the most influential kingdom in Uganda when the British rewarded it for its collaboration by giving it territories that belonged to the western kingdom of Bunyoro.

Many Baganda have, for several years, unsuccessfully lobbied the government to introduce a federal form of government that would give some autonomy to the regions.

________________

The Uganda Record

Wednesday, 17th March 2010

Who burnt the Kasubi Tombs?

The royal Buganda tombs at Kasubi on July 19, 2009.

The Buganda royal site, the Tombs at Kasubi, have been razed to the ground in a fire that swept through the premises shortly after 9:00p.m. on Tuesday night, March 16, 2010.

Witnesses at the scene at the time of the fire said it had started without warning or build up and appears to have been the work of an arsonist.

Hundreds of distressed and wailing Baganda gathered at the burning building and tried desperately to extinguish the fire but were reduced to tears and helplessly watching the grass-thatched complex go up in flames.

When the police arrived, it too failed to put out the fire and when the crowd got rowdy, gunshots and teargas were fired in the air, further angering the crowd.

WBS television and NTV aired segments of the inferno, while NBS television and Record TV run extensive video footage of the scenes of chaos, anger and the burning premises.

As gleaned from the TV footage, the anger of the crowd gathered at the tombs appeared to be directed at President Museveni, with many voices caught on camera angrily declaring that no matter what, one day he would perish in a fire too.

SMS text messages flying about in Kampala mentioned the fire and usually pointed the finger at Museveni.

The Katikiiro of Buganda, J.B. Walusimbi, Prince Kassim Nakibinge, and Buganda Information minister Medard S. Lubega were among the senior kingdom officials first at the scene.

The tombs, listed as one of hundreds of World Heritage Sites by the United Nations cultural agency UNESCO, were one of the most visited historic sites in Uganda.

Built just over 100 years ago, they are the traditional burial ground of Buganda’s kings, as well as the repository of some of the most valuable and irreplaceable cultural artifacts in Buganda.

Who set the royal tombs on fire?

The Daily Monitor newspaper, in its edition of Wednesday March 17, 2010, quoted eye witnesses as saying that a white pickup without number plates was at the scene.

A woman spoke of seeing a white box left at the tombs, then a loud explosion just before the historic site burst into flames.

When nearby motorcycle riders tried to block the pickup, now speeding off the scene, somebody inside or seated on the outside of the vehicle fired in the air to disperse the motorcycle riders.

“[T]he fleeing man shot in the air to scare away riders in his pursuit,” the Daily Monitor reported.

This, clearly, was an act of arson and sabotage. Whoever lit that fire knows what the Kasubi Tombs mean to Buganda. It is like setting fire to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Westminster Abbey in London, historic burial site of some of England’s most revered figures.

The purpose of burning Kasubi Tombs would have been two fold.

From the point of view of one trying to cause the Museveni government to lose any remaining support in Buganda, it would have been to trigger off riots or deep and boiling anger among the Baganda.

From the point of view of a state actor, to set the tombs on fire and destroy them would achieve the goal of creating conditions of such unrest and insecurity as to warrant the proclamation of a state of emergency in Buganda.

Whatever the truth, this was an act of supreme political sabotage, not mere arson. The only act that would exceed this would be to assassinate the Kabaka of Buganda or to burn down one of his palaces.

The fact of a loud explosion preceding the break out of a fire was the hallmark of the fires that struck Budo Junior School and several others schools in and outside Kampala in 2008 and the Park Yard Market near Nakivubo Stadium in 2009. Explosives were used.

What makes the Kasubi fire even more suspicious was the reported firing in the air by the getaway car. Had the tombs been set on fire by an ordinary arsonist, he would have made it his top priority to flee the scene as quietly and inconspicuously as possible. To fire gunshots in the air could only attract attention.

More importantly, to have the audacity to fire gunshots in the air suggests the confidence of an arsonist with some measure of state protection, or membership in the official state security and military apparatus.

In its reporting and discussion of the fire on Wednesday morning, NBS television kept receiving SMS text messages from viewers mentioning their belief that it was the government.

As the fire raged on Tuesday night, the Catholic Church-run radio station, Radio Maria, kept receiving phone calls by listeners accusing the government of being behind the fire and had to discontinue the discussion for fear of being accused of inciting the public.

It was noticeable, on Wednesday morning, that most FM radio stations in Kampala avoided discussing the fire during their breakfast shows, mindful of what live phone calls from listeners would say and knowing the risk they run in having their operating licenses withdrawn.

The caution taken by the radio stations not to discuss the fire in itself reflects the widespread anger among the public and their belief that this was a state-orchestrated attack on Buganda.

Watch Joseph Koney and His kids  Army

___

30 years since the fall of the Amin regime
___________

________________