Why Do We Call Susan Rice a Racist?
Because She Is One
by Lawrence K. Freeman
Among the filthy British agents who are leading the Obama Administration, and thus the United States, into disaster, is United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice. Recent evidence that Rice's influence is on the ascendancy in the Administration, impelled Lyndon LaRouche to commission the following dossier on the Riceist Susan Rice, as a matter of urgency.
U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan, Maj. Gen. Scott Gration (ret.) was sandbagged into repeating the fraudulent charge of genocide against the nation of Sudan, which he knows to be untrue, when he was grilled by Rep. Donald Payne's (D-N.J.) House Subcommittee on African and Global Health on Dec. 3. One week later, Ambassador Rice, a longtime anglophile racist and hater of the Muslim-dominated government of Sudan, speaking at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, represented President Obama's "get tough" policy towards Sudan, Zimbabwe, and Myanmar. Rice expressed her anger that there have not been "enough consequences" for Sudan's "crimes against humanity—we say genocide," and complained that President Gen. Omar al-Bashir still governs the country and travels freely. Rice went on to highlight that portion of Obama's speech in Oslo, accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, where he ironically justified pre-emptive military intervention action against Sudan, Myanmar, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, because there "must be consequences" for human rights violations; and against Iran and North Korea for allegedly developing nuclear weapons. The main targets of Obama's "new" bellicose foreign policy are China, Iran, and Sudan, with Rice now functioning as a chief spokesman for that policy. Thus, it is hardly surprising that Gration is being put in a vise to deliver on that policy toward Sudan, or face a forced resignation.
The pretext for Obama's and Rice's threats against other nations are allegations of human rights violations and genocide, taken straight out of Tony Blair's speech, presumptuously titled "Doctrine of the International Community," at the Chicago Economic Club on April 24, 1999.
As the British-centered monetarist system continues its chaotic disintegration, we can expect Obama to override more moderate policies offered by the State Department, and give targeted nations hell. Rice played a particularly nasty role as a senior foreign policy advisor to then-candidate Barack Obama in the 2008 Democratic Presidential primaries, where she was used by his campaign to challenge Sen. Hillary Clinton's foreign policy expertise. Rice coveted appointment as Secretary of State, which, to her disappointment, was given to Clinton; according to some, Rice has not given up her aspiration for that top post.
Her British Pedigree
To understand Rice's startling display of racism towards Africa, it is useful to examine her training by, and affection for, those institutions that represent the inner core of British imperialist policy historically:
1990: A Rhodes Scholar, she received her PhD in International Relations from New College, Oxford.
1990: Awarded Royal Commonwealth Society's Walter Frewen Lord Prize for outstanding research in the field of Commonwealth History.
1992: Recipient of the first annual award given by the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) and the British International Studies Association for the most distinguished dissertation in the U.K. in the field of international studies. (It was at Chatham House that Henry Kissinger, in a speech in 1982, declared that his primary loyalty as U.S. Secretary of State and National Security Advisor was to the British Empire.) Her dissertation, "The Commonwealth Initiative in Zimbabwe, 1979-1980: Implications for International Peacekeeping," praised the British peacekeeping transition, after the Empire engineered a 13-year war against the liberation of the people of Zimbabwe.
1993-95: Director for International Organizations and Peacekeeping at the National Security Council.
1995-97: Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for African Affairs.
1997-2001: Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs. Many speculate that her mentor or godmother, Madeline Albright, who was then Secretary of State, was instrumental in securing this position. Albright is associated with the ideology of Zbigniew Brzezinski and, like her father, is a follower of the British Fabian H.G. Wells.
May 1999: Honored as the Bram Fischer Memorial Lecturer at Rhodes House, Oxford, while she was U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Rice said how happy she was to be there: "To be at Rhodes House tonight with so many friends, benefactors, and mentors is a personal privilege. It is like a coming home for me for much of what I know about Africa was discovered within these walls, refined at this great university, with generous support of the Rhodes Trust." (Cecil Rhodes was a leading Fabian-imperialist racist who, in the second half of the 19th Century, was determined to bring all Africa under the control of the British Empire.) Rice also lied that Sudan was seeking a chemical weapons capability.
2002: Brookings Institution, Senior Fellow in the Foreign Policy and Global Economy Development program.
Rice's Anti-African Racism
While serving at the NSC and State Department, Rice became part of the team that opposed the Islamic leadership of Sudanese President Omar-al Bashir, which team is still operating today to derail Gen. Scott Gration's diplomacy. In addition to Rice, the rabid haters of Sudan include John Prendergast, who has been leading the fraudulent but profitable Save Darfur movement through his ENOUGH organization, housed at the Center for American Progress, and Roger Winter, who is an unabashed advocate of the break-up of Sudan. The three have been leading a faction in Washington for many years to overthrow the Bashir government and his National Congress Party (NCP). Rice's blind rage against Sudan was so intense, that she refused to ever meet with the then Sudanese ambassador to Washington, Mahdi Ibrahim Mohammed, which was part of her job, since diplomatic relations between the United States and Sudan had not yet been terminated. Quite an attitude for a U.S. diplomat responsible for African policy.
While many diplomats from the U.S. and Africa recognized Rice's lack of qualifications to assume the top post in the State Department for Africa, they miss the essential point about her mentality: Rice was then, and continues to be today, anti-African, as the following chronology shows.
- Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at her confirmation hearing on Sept. 2, 1997, Rice said: "In concert with concerned members of Congress, we have also recast our policy towards Sudan to apply additional pressure aimed at isolating the Khartoum regime in order to contain the threat it poses to U.S. interests and to compel it to halt its support for terrorism and its grave human rights abuses. We have also provided for the first time defensive military assistance to Sudan's neighbors, which face a direct threat from Sudanese-sponsored insurgencies."
Rice lied about Sudan being engaged in state-sponsored terrorism that threatened the United States, but admits that the U.S. sent arms to be used against Sudan, including arming the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) of Southern Sudan. Despite Rice's repeated lie that Sudan is the only state in sub-Saharan Africa that poses a direct threat to U.S. national security interests, no evidence has ever been made public, even to this day, to corroborate that allegation. In fact, the U.S. intelligence community has admitted that it has no such evidence, and has collaborated with its counterparts in Sudan in fighting terrorism.
- In the second term of the Clinton Presidency, Rice protected the interests of pharmaceutical industries from the demands of Africans suffering from AIDS. Rice joined fellow racist, and now-exposed population-reduction advocate Vice President Al Gore, in pressuring the newly elected South African President, Thabo Mbeki, not to produce less expensive generic drugs to combat the spread of AIDS. To achieve this reversal of Section 15C of the South African Medicines Act, Rice threatened the newly liberated nation with sanctions and tariffs.
- For years, there was more than speculation that a rogue operation in the U.S. government was supporting the 1996 invasion of the Democratic Republic of Congo (D.R.C.) by rebel movements sponsored by Rwanda and Uganda. This was while Rice was serving as Special Assistant to the President, and Senior Director for African Affairs at the NSC. Howard French, writing in the New York Review of Books (Sept. 24, 2009), confirms Rice's involvement in violating the D.R.C.s sovereignty, quoting her, saying that, "Museveni [of Uganda] and Kagame [of Rwanda] agree that the basic problem in the Great Lakes is the danger of a resurgence of genocide [referring to the Hutus who fled to the D.R.C. after Kagame took over Rwanda—LKF], and they know how to deal with that. The only thing we have to do is look the other way." Rice's "looking the other way" was followed by a decade of killing in the D.R.C., and the looting of its natural resources by Rwanda and Uganda.
After the second invasion of the D.R.C. by Uganda and Rwanda, which began Aug. 2, 1998, Rice played a critical role in imposing a settlement (the Lusaka Accord), which did not recognize the legitimacy of the D.R.C. as a sovereign nation, or Laurent Kabila as its President. The agreement pushed by Rice and Richard Holbrooke, then U.S. Ambassador to the UN, called for step-by-step withdrawal of foreign troops within 180 days (which was never adhered to), instead of immediately, as the Organization of African Unity and Southern Africa Development Community had called for.
Holbrooke publicly acknowledged that the British had initiated the process that led to the Lusaka Accord. In the face of African opposition to the version of the accord that Rice was pushing, she continued to insist that "Lusaka is the only viable way. It can and must be implemented." Kabila finally acquiesced, because of the implicit threat that further backing would be given to the invading forces, unless he did. The Lusaka agreement left the occupiers in the D.R.C., sanctioned its "balkanization," and left a huge portion of the country (some reports indicate nearly half) under the control of Rwanda and Uganda, and of rebel groups that those two countries controlled. It was only by 2003 that most, but not all foreign troops were withdrawn, leaving only their proxies.
- In 1998, Rice was instrumental in orchestrating the bombing of the al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Omdurman, Sudan, just outside of Khartoum, allegedly for producing chemical weapons that could be used in terrorist attacks on the United States. Not a shred of evidence was ever found to justify the al-Shifa attack, and the U.S. subsequently apologized and offered compensation.
- For five years, from 1996, until weeks before the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the United States, the Sudanese government had tried repeatedly, but without success, to share with U.S. intelligence services its own intelligence files on Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Even when the FBI and others wished to accept these offers, they were overruled by Secretary of State Albright and Assistant Secretary for Africa Rice. Rice had politicized the intelligence by her hostility to any collaboration with the Sudanese government. Various back-channel efforts were also stymied by Rice. When the U.S. intelligence community finally succeeded in getting the Clinton Administration to send a joint FBI-CIA team to Sudan in May 2000, despite resistance from Rice, they found no terrorist training camps or sanctuaries, and gave Sudan a clean bill of health.
- In March 1998, Rice threatened Nigeria that if Gen. Sani Abacha were elected as President, "Let me state clearly and unequivocally to you today that an electoral victory by any military candidate in the forthcoming Presidential election would be unacceptable." This undiplomatic enunciation was contrary to the views of President Clinton, who, two weeks later, while in South Africa, expressed hope that Abacha would move Nigeria towards democracy.
- On Jan. 26, 2009, at her first press conference as U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Rice blatantly lied when she wept crocodile tears about "ongoing genocide" in Darfur. This year, two UN officials responsible for military and civilian deployments in Darfur refuted the "ongoing genocide" lie, but Rice has succeeded in bludgeoning General Gration to publicly repeat this falsehood, in order to remain in control of the negotiations with Sudan.
- On March 6, 2009, in an interview on National Public Radio, Rice called for keeping the option of a military no-fly zone over Sudan on the table.
- In April 2009, Rice upbraided the civilian head of the UN-African Union peacekeeping forces, after he described the conflict in Darfur as a low-intensity conflict, not a war, and certainly not "ongoing genocide." Rice's action led to his resignation.
- Rice has consistently supported the illegitimate International Criminal Court's (ICC) arrest warrant for Sudanese President Bashir, issued in March 2009. Up to this point, the U.S. has refused to give up its own sovereignty to become part of the British-created imperial world government court.
Congress Throws Rice at Gration
The attacks on Gration during his testimony at the Dec. 3 hearing are the direct product of Rice's growing influence in the Obama Administration, as Obama acts more and more like a puppet of British policy. Witness Obama's behavior at the failed Copenhagen Climate Conference, in his support for the British oligarchy's demands for population reduction. Obama is also suffering the steepest loss of approval from the American population of any American President at this time in his Presidency, due to his murderous economic and health-care policies. The shift inside the Obama camp was evident in the treatment of Gration, and Gration's own inability to respond truthfully under fire. Committee chairman Payne, who continues to lead the campaign against Sudan in the Congress, invited Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) to take the point against Gration in the hearing. In a mean-spirited display of Aristotelian logic chopping, Brownback succeeded in backing Gration into a corner over allegations of "ongoing" genocide.
Below is the crucial exchange between Gration and Brownback:
Brownback: General Gration, thank you for joining us. And it's a tough job that you have, but I am terribly troubled by this situation. President Bashir—well, I guess I should ask you—he has participated in the genocide in Sudan. Is that correct?
Gration: Yes, sir. He was the President of the country during the time that genocide took place, and therefore he would've participated.
Brownback: And so he has led the genocide in Darfur.
Gration: His government was responsible for that, and he was the leader of the government; therefore, he would have led them.
Brownback: And President Bashir is an indicted war criminal by the ICC?
Gration: He is.
Brownback: Has the United States government been negotiating, dealing or otherwise associating with any individual from Sudan who has been directly implicated in committing genocides or crimes against humanity?
Gration: Do I understand that you are asking, are we dealing with people that have been involved in the genocide or crimes against humanity?
Brownback: Have we been negotiating, dealing, or otherwise associating with any individual from Sudan who has been directly implicated in committing genocide or crimes against humanity?
Gration: I have never met with President Bashir, and we don't have plans to meet with President Bashir. There are people that we negotiate with that are part of the NCP [Bashir's party, the National Congress Party], that are part of that government. That is the only way that we have been able to reach agreement on the Comprehensive Peace Agreement.
It's the only way we've been able to reach agreements on humanitarian assistance in Darfur. It's the only way we've been able to reach agreements on the Chad-Sudan border conflict, agreements in Delhi, and we are going to have to continue to have engagement, not for engagement's sake, but to save lives and to move the ball forward in Sudan.
Brownback: Have any of those individuals been involved directly or indirectly in committing genocide or crimes against humanity?
Gration: I don't know that directly. I understand that some of the people were in the government at the time, especially between 2003 and 2005, but I am not—I have no direct knowledge of their direct involvement in it.
Brownback: They're in the leadership and the government in Sudan—individuals you are negotiating with or dealing with?
Gration: I'm negotiating with individuals that are in high-level positions in the government of Sudan.
Brownback: You are dealing with a government that is conducting an ongoing genocide. Is that correct?
Gration: I'm dealing with the government.
Brownback: That is conducting an ongoing genocide in Sudan?
Gration: I'm dealing with the government and in an effort to end the conflict, in an effort to end gross human rights abuses.
Brownback: I understand the objective. I'm asking you, are you dealing with a government that has conducted an ongoing genocide in Sudan?
Gration: I am dealing with—as I said, I am dealing with the government, in Khartoum, of Sudan.
Brownback: Which is currently conducting genocide in Sudan. Is that correct?
Gration: That's correct.
Gration continued to defend the progress he has made in working with the ruling National Congress Party. In response to allegations that Bashir and the NCP are providing weapons to tribal militias in the South, Gration stated emphatically that he has no evidence to support such accusations. He also rejected the claims by Rep. Edward Royce (R-Calif.) that the Lords Resistance Army, which is creating mayhem in Uganda, the D.R.C., and Southern Sudan, by terrorizing the population, is going to link up with Sudan's Armed Forces in Darfur for logistical support and a safe haven. Gration, to the chagrin of the members of the Committee, insisted that "things are improving" in Sudan, through cooperation with the Sudanese government, and that the basic needs of food, sanitation, water, and health are being fulfilled in the Darfur camps. However, the hearing overall represented a victory for Rice and her band of followers, who have no interest in promoting peace and development for the Sudanese people, which would also strategically help stabilize East Africa. Gration does care about the people of Sudan, but he capitulated to the pressure of the "Riceists" in the Congress.
One Year To Go: Which Way for Sudan?
With a little more than a year to go until the January 2011 referendum, when the people of Southern Sudan will vote to either remain part of "one sovereign Sudan," or to secede, Sudan and much of Africa are fraught with danger over the outcome of that decision. If the British-"Riceist" crowd remains in control of U.S. policy, Sudan would be at serious risk of returning to war, which would be far bloodier than the previous multi-decade civil war, due to the increase in arms shipments to Southern Sudan, facilitated by the likes of Roger Winters.
Before the referendum, Sudan is to conduct a national election in April 2010. Despite the intentions of the government, it is still possible that this election, already postponed twice, may not occur, or could erupt in pre-planned violence (remember Kenya 2008). Gration reported to the House Committee that there has been significant progress in registering citizens to vote. His figures are: 60%, with 7.4 million people in the North; just under 50%, with 1.79 million people in Darfur; and 60%, with 2.5 million in the South. Gration reminded the Congress that in the last election in Sudan, only 5 million were registered to vote, and he estimates that almost 12 million will be registered for this election. He told the Committee: "That allows the Sudanese the option of expressing their will in the election, and I think that's very important." Other estimates are that close to 15 million Sudanese will be registered by the time of the April election, which is an historic accomplishment in such a large, undeveloped country of 38-39 million people.
The government of Sudan is committed to the success of the April election and the January 2011 referendum. They are trying to resolve the last outstanding issues between the NCP and the SPLM before the National Parliament adjourns this month.
While reports of cooperation on legislative action by the NCP and SLPM to secure both the election and referendum, could be taken as an optimistic sign, Lyndon LaRouche warned not to be taken in by short-term trends. With the ongoing collapse of the financial system, LaRouche said, "short-term trends can disappear quickly." Nothing is certain. There is apprehension that various longtime agents of British influence can be activated to instigate violence and chaos to disrupt the election, and fears that the SPLM will pre-emptively separate from Sudan before the referendum vote even occurs. Also, the refusal of the SPLM to negotiate on post-referendum issue—such as the Nile Water Agreement with Egypt, how to deal with Sudan's debt, and defining citizenship in a divided country—is very serious, and could be a casus belli. If these disruptions are supported by the "Riceists" in the U.S., then it would be President Obama, and Susan Rice, who would be culpable of genocide against Africa.