In this issue:

Administration in No Hurry To Answer Liberia's Prayers

Marines Head for Liberian Waters—No Decision To Intervene

Powell Took the Case for U.S. Role in Liberia to Neo-Cons

Fuerth Answers Powell, Opposes Liberia Intervention

Are Weapons Supplies to Liberian Combatants Diminishing?

Are Weapons Supplies to Liberian Combatants Diminishing?

Monrovia a Nightmare Since July 21

AIDS Could Mean Economic Catastrophe for South Africa

Sao Tome Coup Attempt Ends With Victory for Synarchy

Is U.S. Deliberately Blowing Up the Sudan Talks?

From Volume 2, Issue Number 30 of Electronic Intelligence Weekly, Published July 29, 2003
Africa News Digest

Administration in No Hurry To Answer Liberia's Prayers

Secretary of State Colin Powell took his case for U.S. intervention in Liberia on moral grounds, to the editors of the neo-conservative Washington Times in an interview that appeared on its front page July 23. Next day, the neo-con opposition to intervention shot back with a column by Likudnik Leon Fuerth (he was a top adviser to Al Gore) in the Financial Times of London. Fuerth argued that Powell was overturning a basic principle of the Bush Administration—that interventions must be based on clearly defined U.S. national security interests. Who should be surprised that the national security adviser of former VP Al Gore should thus be looking out for the purity of alleged Bush Administration principles? Or that he has no idea where U.S. national security interests actually lie?

A New York Times editorial, also on July 24, supported Powell, as had Princeton Lyman, a senior fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations and former Ambassador to Nigeria, in a Washington Post op-ed July 19 (see last week's Africa Digest).

The Times editorial stated, "Mr. Bush should dispatch 800 to 2,000 American soldiers to lead a temporary multinational intervention force capable of enforcing a cease-fire and paving the way for an African-led peacekeeping mission. Further delay may needlessly condemn thousands of Liberian civilians to death...."

In Senate Armed Services Committee hearings July 24, however, Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) echoed Leon Fuerth.

The continuing unwillingness of the White House to do the urgent minimum to protect more than a million Liberians in Monrovia, the capital, from bullets, mortar fire, cholera, dysentery, and starvation, is a reminder that Straussian neo-con Dick Cheney still controls the President. Some of the details are reported in the stories that follow.

Marines Head for Liberian Waters—No Decision To Intervene

President Bush's announcement of Marines on their way to Liberian waters offers only a glimmer of hope for useful intervention there. Bush ordered a naval amphibious force of 2,300 Marines to sail from the Mediterranean to a position off the Liberian coast on July 25. The three-ship Amphibious Ready Group led by a helicopter carrier will arrive in early August. In his Rose Garden appearance with Palestinian Prime Minister Abu Mazen/Mahmoud Abbas July 25, Bush said, "Aid can't get to people. We're worried about the outbreak of disease. And so our commitment is to enable [the Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS] to go in." Bush had earlier pledged $10 million to support the ECOWAS mission. He said the UN "will be responsible for developing a political solution."

A "senior U.S. official" said, however, that the Marines' presence did not mean that all, or even most of them would go ashore, according to the Washington Post July 26. The official added that there had been no "hard decision" that U.S. troops would actually go to Liberia, "and he stressed that the troops would not engage in any peacekeeping mission," but "might be used to make sure humanitarian aid is being distributed should a vanguard of Nigerian troops succeed in stabilizing the situation." The remarks of Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz July 27, on Fox News and NBC's Meet the Press, were in agreement with those of the "senior U.S. official."

But there is no agreement between U.S. and UN negotiators on one side, and Nigerians on the other, over the amount and kinds of logistical and financial support the Nigerian vanguard will receive, after weeks of talks. Nigeria says it is prepared to deploy their forces by Aug. 2 and be fully operational within nine days, if their conditions are met, the Post says.

The Post account continues, "'I don't think it's going to happen,' said one UN official, referring to the Nigerian deployment schedule. 'I don't blame the Nigerians.'"

A "senior Administration official" cited by the New York Times July 26 said Bush's decision was intended to goose ECOWAS into action: "There was something of a stalemate, everyone waiting for everyone else," the official said.

Powell Took the Case for U.S. Role in Liberia to Neo-Cons

Colin Powell made the case for adequate U.S. support for a West African intervention into Liberia before reporters and editors of the Washington Times July 23. "We do have some obligation," he said, "not to look away.... We looked away once before in Rwanda, with tragic consequences." He said the U.S. is already stretching its forces, but there are "still unused capabilities." West African governments (ECOWAS) "just don't have the capacity" to sustain field forces, he said.

The U.S. will have "nothing to do" with the transition after President Taylor's departure, he said, evidently meaning that that is up to the UN. Powell is coordinating daily with Kofi Annan, who met not long ago with President Bush to discuss this very topic.

Other reports continue to suggest that the population of especially Monrovia can only be rescued by a peace-making, rather than a peacekeeping, force. This raises the question of whether and how Powell's vision can be fulfilled, since ECOWAS is not contemplating a peace-making intervention. Nigerian President Obasanjo "made it clear that he would not sanction deployment of troops until a ceasefire was in place. To intervene now, he said, would be to step into a raging war and the outcome was unclear," according to the Independent (UK) July 23.

Fuerth Answers Powell, Opposes Liberia Intervention

Neo-con Leon Fuerth, former national security adviser to former Vice President Al Gore, brought the Straussians' opposition to a U.S. intervention in Liberia out into the open, in an op-ed in the Financial Times July 24, doing a service for his neo-con allies in the Bush Administration by raising the matter first from the Democratic side.

In "Liberia Does Not Fit the Doctrine," Fuerth says, "Liberia simply does not fit the mold of U.S. strategic interest as defined by the Administration and there is no way to use military force there that does not fundamentally contradict policy." Recalling Powell's assertion that the U.S. has an obligation not to ignore the catastrophe, Fuerth writes, "the mere fact that Mr. Powell has uttered these words pierces the Administration's basic philosophy about the use of force.... So, if Mr. Powell is now declaring that the present Administration will consider the use of force where no value other than moral is involved, he has announced a fundamental change." But surely, Fuerth adds, he doesn't mean to do so, but only to "explain why there should be an exception.... But ... if Liberia qualifies, what standard will be used to judge U.S. participation in some other place where terrible things are happening to innocent people, for example, in the Congo?"

No mention here of Pat Robertson's blood diamonds, Barrick Gold, and the rest!

Are Weapons Supplies to Liberian Combatants Diminishing?

Alex Vines, Africa program head at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, told the Financial Times July 24, "We are probably going to come to a lull in fighting because everyone is running out of ammunition. That is why a stabilization force has to go in—so LURD doesn't have the opportunity to capitalize on the situation." LURD would have the edge in attempting to rearm by hook or crook.

As of July 27, there has been no sign of diminished firepower, raising the question of how many tens of thousands of noncombatants will die of disease and hunger before a lull arrives.

Liberian President Charles Taylor's Press Secretary, Vaani Passawe, however, told allAfrica July 23 that his government had "direct evidence" the U.S. was backing LURD. AllAfrica writes, "Passawe said aid money given to neighboring Guinea by the U.S. was being used by LURD rebels to lease armaments with U.S. knowledge." The International Crisis Group, in its April 30 report, "Tackling Liberia," wrote that "The U.S. has stepped up military support of Guinea (and some claim the LURD)."

Monrovia a Nightmare Since July 21

The Liberian capital has been a nightmare since July 21, as President Taylor's forces fight to the death with LURD rebels. "A barrage of indiscriminate shelling tore apart the Liberian capital" July 21, wrote Newsday's Africa correspondent. "Dozens of mortar bombs slammed into Monrovia's diplomatic quarter," said Reuters. The people are "fleeing basically nowhere. There is no shelter, no food, no water," Muktar Farah of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs told Reuters July 21.

A mortar shell landed in each of the two adjacent U.S. embassy compounds, one of them shortly after 21 Marines were dropped in by helicopter to beef up embassy defenses. The other, landing in the compound across the street, killed 25 of the 10,000 to 25,000 Liberians sheltering there.

The joy of the population when it thought U.S. forces were coming, is now sometimes turning to rage. When the Marines arrived, Robita Christopher, a Liberian on the scene, told Reuters, "It shows they value property more than human lives. I hope the rockets hit them in the embassy so they die." Reuters reported, "An angry crowd laid 18 bodies, one of them headless, in front of the embassy and hurled abuse at the mission."

Hunger and disease are taking over. "The UN's warehouses are right in the fighting. If they've been looted, the city will run out of food next week," EU aid coordinator David Parker told The Scotsman by telephone from Monrovia July 23. The fighting has cut the city off from agricultural areas. And LURD now has control of the port area where the food warehouses are. They are indeed being looted by LURD. Crowds outside the U.S. embassy are now demanding food. There is no safe water in the city. Aid agencies are logging 350 new cholera cases a week, but many cannot reach the agencies, and the rate will now soar, along with dysentery.

AIDS Could Mean Economic Catastrophe for South Africa

A study just released by the World Bank and Heidelberg University in Germany, "The Long-Run Economic Costs of AIDS: Theory and an Application to South Africa," projects that if nothing dramatic is done to stem the spread of AIDS, South Africa faces an inescapable descent into the economic backwardness of past centuries, dependent upon child labor, with no infrastructure. For the full report, see Economics News Digest in this issue of EIW.

Sao Tome Coup Attempt Ends With Victory for Synarchy

The coup in Sao Tome and Principe has ended with an agreement in line with the synarchist blueprint of the neo-cons' Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS). Sao Tome's President Fradique de Menezes returned to his country July 23, accompanied by Nigerian President Obasanjo, after an agreement was reached between himself and the coup leaders, through the mediation of a team of diplomats from the African Union, Portugal, Brazil, and the U.S., led by Congo-Brazzaville Foreign Minister Rodolphe Adada.

Under the agreement, de Menezes remains President and the Parliament remains, and all soldiers involved in the coup may be granted amnesty by vote of Parliament. Parliament met and approved the amnesty. The accord calls for legislation to make government oil dealings more transparent, including a "guarantee committee" with international participation.

The parties agreed to analyze the possibility of a new government. "Political analysts" in Sao Tome, cited by Reuters July 25, said a Cabinet reshuffle was more likely, and that Maria das Neves, an IMF hardliner, would probably remain as Prime Minister.

UN IRIN reports that many of those involved in the coup were former members of the Buffalo Battalion, a mercenary unit created by the apartheid government in South Africa in the 1970s to fight in Namibia and Angola. They have now been given "special amnesty guarantees." These are primarily or entirely Sao Tome citizens, who run the Christian Democratic Front, a party with no parliamentary seats. They said their coup was to relieve the sufferings of the poor.

The outcome of the bloodless coup—with international oversight of government receipts and expenditures—brings Sao Tome into line with the specifications of IASPS and its Africa Oil Policy Initiative Group (AOPIG).

Is U.S. Deliberately Blowing Up the Sudan Talks?

With explosive issues unresolved in talks between the government of Sudan (GOS) and SPLA rebels, U.S. envoy John Danforth said, at a July 19 press conference in Nairobi, that he has nothing further to suggest. He claimed remaining issues are not serious, that only political will is lacking, and that agreement must be reached within weeks, not months, or the "international community" will withdraw from the process.

The July 12 draft agreement of the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD)—which has U.S. backing and overshadows any Arab role—included giving the SPLA a virtual monopoly of power in the South, to the exclusion of other southern political forces; a separate council of ministers, army and central bank in the South; lifting Islamic law in Khartoum during the six years of transition; and carving out a part of Khartoum as a joint capital. GOS said this is inconsistent with the Machakos Protocol of 2002. GOS President Omar al-Beshir responded to them July 14, saying, "Let IGAD and those behind it go to hell"; he called the draft a "document of war, destruction, and division."

GOS has asked the Arab League and Egypt to intervene with the SPLA and the IGAD mediators. Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa has "promised to play a fundamental role to narrow the points of view," said Riak Quai, the VP of the GOS ruling party. Egypt's Foreign Minister met with Danforth, but Danforth's July 19 press conference showed the meeting had no noticeable effect.

The International Crisis Group's David Mozerski told AFP in Nairobi, "If the international community pulls out, we are looking at the end of the peace process." In that case, he said, there would be an end to promises of development aid, Sudan would not be removed from a U.S. list of states sponsoring terrorism, relations with the West would not be normalized, and punitive provisions of the U.S. Sudan Peace Act would come into effect.

All rights reserved © 2003 EIRNS