Warmongering and Dropping Bombs on Africa: This is What AFRICOM Looks Like
By Harold Green
March 23, 2011
As Barack Obama prepares to go to Ireland to celebrate his Irish roots (after a brief stopover in South America), Operation Odyssey Dawn, the latest outburst of white aggression against an African country, though significantly populated by interloping Arabs, is in full effect. While the stated purpose of this assault on a sovereign nation is "humanitarian intervention", the surrounding facts suggest less than auspicious reasons.
Why this decision to attack Libya and not other Arab countries such as Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, all of which in recent days have used significant violence against protesting citizens? One does not have to dig very deep to find the answer to this question. In recent weeks, researchers such as Glen Ford Keith Harmon Snow, Gerald Perreria and Michel Chossudovsky all have written very insightful exposÚs exposing the true motives behind this recent episode of racist violence. Professor Gerald Horne on a recent appearance on KPFK's Spotlite Africa, gave an excellent analysis of the duplicitous nature of Britain, France and the US decision to attack Libya.
Despite the fantasy they have been trying to sell us about saving lives, what this invasion is really about is political expediency and most significantly, money and resource-grabbing. With the whimsicalness of a feather blowing in the wind, all of these white governments, who just moments before dropping their bombs on Libya, were all doing business with the Gaddafi government, have now become Gaddafi's professed enemy. With the charge of human rights abuse as a cover, they decided to first freeze (steal) 30 billion dollars of Libyan assets. To further justify this theft, NATO, using the United Nations, proceeded to pressure (some say dupe) the Arab League (and unsuccessfully the Africa Union), into backing them in condemning Muammar Gaddafi's attacks on so-called rebels.
A no-fly zone resolution would soon follow, effectively grounding Libya's air force and preventing Libya from attacking rebels groups from the air and defending itself against an eminent NATO assault. All of this done without any of these NATO countries formally declaring war through their respective parliaments, and in the case of the US, Congress. If Muammar Gaddafi was unfairly attacking armed rebels by bombing their positions in rebel held territory, what then would one call NATO's bombing of the Libyan government, while making it illegal for the Libyan government to bomb them back! Of course white arrogance never thinks we should ask such questions.
Libya's stolen 30 billion dollars isn't the only bounty NATO hopes to reward themselves with in this invasion. Libya's produces one of the finest grade of petroleum in the world (that sweet African crude), and for the last 41 years of Gaddafi's rule, European and American oil companies have not been allowed to monopolise it. Gaddafi's removal from power would no doubt open the door for American, Britain and French oil companies to set their own terms for extracting this resource. The timing of the bombing of Libya is not to be overlooked. With Libyan government on the verge of taking back Benghazi, it would put the Libyan government back in control of the area of the country where most of the oil is located.
Recent satellite photos and geological surveys suggest that Libya may have other mineral resources as well. As Michel Chossudovsky reminds us, "Humanitarian intervention is good for business."
Barack Obama since the start of this invasion, has conveniently left the country, safely avoiding any direct criticism from protesters (incuding members of his own party in Congress) who are condemning, not only the Libyan invasion, but the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. For someone who ran on a campaign of change, it is becoming more and more difficult to distinguish Obama's behavior from that of his many white predecessors. It appears that he has abandoned any notion of being an enlightened "first Black president" of the United States, and instead has fully embraced a "stupid white man" agenda.
Being a proud half-white person in a country like America no doubt has it's benefits. Barack Obama has fully apprised himself of this fact, and has no made secret at least by his actions, that his main objective is to appease the sentiments of white people, whether they like him or not. The crass groveling he as engaged in since becoming president has for many of us, been beyond embarrassing. He has, in many instances, and without hesitation, embraced the worst aspects of white behavior.
The most recent display of this behavior, the duplicitous decision to invade Libya, convinces many of us that his becoming president, is not a fulfillment of Dr. Martin Luther King's Dream as many fawning and unquestioning supporters of Barack Obama has erroneously and ridiculously suggested, but rather, an ominous manifestation of Dr. King's - and African people in general - worst nightmare.
What has been the worst human rights abuses since this so-called uprising in Libya has started? By many accounts, it has not been the Libyan government (some say legitimate) response to armed groups attempting to overthrow it, but the many racist pogroms against Africans living within Libya that these same armed groups have engaged in. Acts which have received little or no coverage in white and Arab (Aljazeera most notably) media.
The attacks against Libyan Africans, were in fact stoked by these same white and Arab media with fallacious reports about "African mercenaries". Barack Obama himself has not uttered one word about this that I am aware of, and even if he has, the barbaric crimes committed against these Africans seem not to be his major concern.
Obama Ignored Anti-Gaddafi Forces Slaughtering of Blacks in Libya
There is no doubt that Barack Obama has far greater loyalty to his white half than he does his African half and for the sake of political expediency, has no problem expending Black concerns and most tragically, Black life, to achieve his political objectives. As he conspires with former colonial powers Britain and France to launch this attack on Libya, many Africans are left to wonder which African country will be next. This first manifestation of the racist and interventionist agenda of AFRICOM (one should read the American Heritage Foundation paper announcing this sinister scheme crossedcrocodiles.wordpress.com), if not stopped, will see African country after African country, many of them still beset with contradictions left over from the colonial period, subjected to similar treatment, using human rights abuse as a pretext.
The accusation of "human rights abuse" has become a rather nebulous charge in recent years. Easily slung around by white countries to condemn non-white leaders, (except the ones they control and support of course), while overlooking the more egregious acts of human rights abuses of their own.
African people and others, have long protested against white governments continued attempts to rule and police the world, their continued brutality and their continued theft of resources with no accountability. Recently, our efforts to stop this behavior has been stifled and thrown off balance by the emergence of Barack Obama. African people understandably, had much to be encouraged about, given the "rhetoric" of his campaign message. It has now become clear, that message was an empty one.
The continued "whiteness" of Barack Obama's behavior underscores what ancestor Dr. Margaret Burroughs, founder of the Dusable African-American Museum in Chicago, and long time fighter for African Liberation, tried to warn us about. During a conversation with a local activist during the 2008 presidential campaign, Dr. Burroughs was asked her opinion of Barack Obama. In her response, she presciently said, "he is not one of us." Her words are ringing truer with each passing day.