Africa Great Lakes Democracy Watch



Welcome to
Africa Great Lakes Democracy Watch Blog. Our objective is to promote the institutions of democracy,social justice,Human Rights,Peace, Freedom of Expression, and Respect to humanity in Rwanda,Uganda,DR Congo, Burundi,Sudan, Tanzania, Kenya,Ethiopia, and Somalia. We strongly believe that Africa will develop if only our presidents stop being rulers of men and become leaders of citizens. We support Breaking the Silence Campaign for DR Congo since we believe the democracy in Rwanda means peace in DRC. Follow this link to learn more about the origin of the war in both Rwanda and DR Congo:http://www.rwandadocumentsproject.net/gsdl/cgi-bin/library


Showing posts with label RWANDA-USA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RWANDA-USA. Show all posts

Monday, May 30, 2011

The 1997 U.S.-sanctioned counter-genocide of Hutu refugees in DRC

President George W. Bush meets with President ...A group of the DRC war criminals from the right:Kabila of DRC, Mbeki of SA, Bush of USA, and Kagame of Rwanda

Adapted from UK-RWANDA Blog

Written by Alex Engwete
Three significant developments happened in the past that would hopefully shed light on the U.S.-sanctioned counter-genocide perpetrated by the Rwandan government against Hutu refugees in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in 1997. The first development was the 5-point memorandum released by Amnesty International (AI) on November 2, 2007 entitled “Rwanda: Suspects must not be transferred to Rwanda courts for trial until it is demonstrated that trials will comply with international standards of justice.

” The very first point, though restricted to the framework of the 1994 genocide and the civil war in Rwanda at that period, seems to also sound as a wake-up to the international community for what happened later on in the DRC in 1997 on Rwanda’s watch and which still needs to be investigated and prosecuted:

“It must be demonstrated that the Rwandan justice system can operate impartially by investigating and prosecuting crimes by all sides.” In other words, in the cutthroat environment of the African Great Lakes, there are hardly good guys on the one hand and bad guys on the other; and thus Rwanda can also be the bad guy. The second development is a delegation of European Union human rights specialists to inquire about the most recent human rights abuse in the Kivu provinces involving mainly the troops of Rwanda-backed rogue General Nkunda, which seem to have borrowed from the 1997 playbook of their backers.

The limited period the EU investigative team will spend in the field---6 days---makes this mission a preposterous exercise though. The last development, reported on OPEDNEWS by Georgianne Nienaber is by far the most significant as it entails the UN High Commission for Human Rights (UNHCR) sending a forensic team in the DRC that would stay in the field for three months and would “map the most serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed within the territory of the DRC between March 1993 and June 2003.”

Though it could be argued that by also covering parts Mobutu’s malfeasances, the net result might amount to a watering down of the most egregious violations that only happened after the Zairian dictator’s fall. But the UNHCR is only picking up where it had left when it had no other option but to withdraw from the DRC ten years ago, in 1997, due to the lack of cooperation by Laurent Kabila and his then Rwandan allies.

What’s more, this time around, the forensic team is free to go through the 40 sites of massacres identified in 1997 and has a whopping $ 2.3m budget which, one hopes, would only be the first installment in this fledging endeavor as there were upward to 200,000 Hutu refugees that were killed by Rwandan troops in a counter-genocide rampage in the Congo jungles for the best part of the first half of 1997. This will prove to be a gargantuan task that can’t be possibly be fully finished in three months either.

What happened in the DRC in 1997?

One has to keep in mind that by 1996 Laurent Kabila, who toppled Mobutu, a one-time rebel leader who was once visited in the mountainous forest of western Congo by the Argentinean-Cuban revolutionary Ernesto Che Guevara in the mid-1960s, was a refugee hawker in Tanzania when he was recruited to be a spokesman of the outfit of opportunist exile Congolese politicians Paul Kagame had set up as figureheads in his design of doing away with the Mobutu regime in neighboring Congo. In several interviews, the Rwandan President had publicly acknowledged the fact the operational planning of the “Congolese revolution” was carried out in Kigali.

Mobutu was dying from prostrate cancer and had allowed armed gangs of defeated Hutu militiamen to run refugee camps at the border of Congo with Rwanda and thus gave ample justification for the retaliatory three-pronged response from Kagame: 1) dismantling of refugee camps; 2) destruction of the structure of the remnants of the Rwandan army and militias in those camps; and 3) toppling of Mobutu.

Faced with a country destroyed by 32 years of graft that had squandered the military might built up for over two decades by American and European military cooperation during the Cold War, Kagame could have achieved these objectives without the participation of his Congolese “lackeys,” but he was aware that the rest of the international community wouldn’t take kindly to any such brazen takeover of another country.

The new Rwandan regime was riding a huge international surf of sympathy and guilt after the rest of the world had just stood idly by as one of the most horrific genocides of modern times was taking place. And the new Rwandan authorities weren’t foolish enough to waste this sizable amount of capital of goodwill. So Kabila was deemed important in the scheme being hatched in Kigali and recruited accordingly.

Also, the United States, as other nations-states for that matter, operates in its foreign policy with the only compass of its “interests.” At one point, it was in the interest of the U.S. to prop up the dictatorship of Mobutu in the Congo as a proxy in the African theater of the Cold War. With the fall of the former Soviet Union, and the emergence of new alliances America was actively creating in the African Great Lakes Region under the aegis of “African Renaissance,” the United States determined that it was in its national “interest” to dump Mobutu and the Congolese.

There was, however, a fourth and far more nefarious objective in Kagame’s mind that one is at a loss to determine whether Kagame’s allies---Kabila and the U.S. that is---were privy to the revenge, indiscriminate, and incremental killings of unarmed Hutu refugees that amounted to a de facto counter-genocide with the minimal estimation of 300,000 dead in the first half of 1997. As James C. McKinley and Howard W. French of The New York Times had it on their November 14, 1997 report entitled “Hidden Horrors: Uncovering the Guilty Footprints Along Zaire’s Long Trail of Death”: “more and more evidence has emerged suggesting that Mr. Kabila and the Rwandans who backed him were also fighting a war of revenge, one deeply intertwined with the ethnic conflicts between Hutu and Tutsi groups that have tormented this region.

The Tutsi troops from Rwanda and Congo who made up the core of Mr. Kabila's army had a powerful motive for vengeance, since thousands of Hutu refugees in the camps had taken part in the slaughter of more than half a million Tutsi in Rwanda in 1994.”

And no amount of forensics in the field would ever ascertain whether the U.S. had prior knowledge of this criminal scheme; though one can certainly assert that the U.S. served as accessory after the commission after these most horrendous crimes. As for Laurent Kabila, after his falling out with his one-time ally, he had this to say in a November 19, 1998 interview with the Belgian daily Le Soir: “Victims were in the thousands.

Never did we expect these people to be so cruel, so bloody, it was revolting. Our fellow citizens were shocked as the [Rwandan] soldiers were asking for their help, to put bodies into bags, to throw them into mass graves. They had to promise not to reveal where they had buried them. We didn’t authorize these massacres, we weren’t even informed.” Well, one would object, that’s what you get when you undertake your “revolution” with foreign troops that had but contempt for you and your indigenous troops. Furthermore, as Laurent Kabila represented Congo in this grim alliance and the atrocities occurred on Congolese soil, with the damning eyewitness documentation of the participation of his own troops (albeit to a lesser extent), even after Koffi Annan was decrying the “slow extermination” of Hutu refugees, and even after the European Union Commissioner on Humanitarian Affairs had accused him on May 6, 1997 of transforming eastern Congo into a “slaughterhouse,” Kabila denied that any massacre was being carried out on his watch and ordered the refugees be removed from the Congo within 60 days---thus violating, as the Congolese rights group ASADHO denounced in June 1998, the 1949 Geneva Convention and the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol.

Modus Operandi of the Counter-genocide: “the best game were the women and children”
At first, the destruction of the Hutu refugees, which started in early 1997, was carried out in small incremental killings, and then it gathered its own momentum, culminating in one single mass disappearance of more than 80,000 children, women, and men. But throughout, the modus operandi was a simple one: drive off aid workers; seal off refugee camps; fire in the air, thus driving off refugees into the jungle; then hunt them down there like game. Their fellow Rwandan pursuers had so much instilled the fear of God in these Hutu that they walked non-stop; and the fittest among crossed the whole expense of the Congo within two weeks, with some crossing the River Congo to Congo-Brazzaville and others reaching as far north as Gabon! (These two countries were also in violation of international conventions as they forcibly repatriated these refugees to Rwanda, from which some of these later escaped to find refuge in the mountainous forests of eastern Congo.) You had to power-walk or die, as stragglers were systematically “mopped up.”

William Shawcross, in his book Deliver us from Evil: Peacekeepers, Warlords, and a World of Endless Conflict (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001, pages 247-248) captures the methodology of the counter-genocide of Hutu in the Congo---from the in-the-spur-of-the-moment killing envy to well-planned mass murders, as well as the dubious role played by the U.S. and other governments with the notable exception of France. He writes:
“In April [1997], Mike McCurry, the White House spokesman, declared that ‘Mobutuism is about to become a creature of history,’ thus nailing U.S. colors more publicly than ever before to [Laurent] Kabila’s alliance’s. Emboldened, Kabila and the Rwandan government both made personal attacks on [Kofi] Annan for his expressions of concern over the plight of the refugees.

In April the UN Commission on Human Rights requested an investigation into the allegations of mass killings and other gross violations of human rights. This followed a report from the UN special rapporteur on Zaire,Roberto Garreton, that the alliance had ‘undoubtedly’ committed massacres. He named forty sites.

The commission was set up, but Kabila made it clear he did not intend to cooperate with it. Mrs. [Sadako] Ogata, the high commissioner, wrote to Annan to say that representations ‘do not appear to have had any effect. The Alliance leadership continues to deny that such gross abuses are occurring… I realize that with the innocent victims there are those not deserving of international protection. But such considerations must not be allowed to excuse inaction, still less to indirectly sanctions summary killings.’

The atrocities continued. Early one morning in late April about twenty Rwandans and or alliance troops entered Lwiro hospital north of Bukavu in Zaire. They seized about fifty children who were there for therapeutic feeding and flung them brutally into the back of a truck. They also took away about sixty adults, including members of the children’s families and caregivers.

At Kasere at the end of April, 80,000 people were waiting for planes. None came. Every night 200 or so people died. The rebels deliberately drove the aid workers away for a week. When they were able to return the place was empty. ‘Nobody. All gone,’ said [Kilian] Kleinschmidt [of UNCHR]. ‘The once full cholera station abandoned. Stretchers, but nobody on them. Even the smell of death had gone, the smell we had worked with all those weeks. A feeling of being manipulated as part of a buildup to something evil.’
The refugees had been killed or were now being hunted through the forests, ‘and the best game were the women and children who had no chance to defend their lives.’
[…]
And so it went on all year long; one reason after another was found to block the team’s access to alleged massacres sites.
[…]
“Month after month went by, and it became clearer that most governments just did not want to know what had really happened in the jungles of eastern Zaire in the first half of 1997. UNHCR might say that 230,000 Hutu were still unaccounted for, but the U.S had always disputed these numbers.”
But the end of 1997, the situation of the UNHCR had become so untenable in the Congo that Kofi Annan decided to call it quit while, according to a report by Howard W. French of The New York Times, “At the United States Embassy in Kinshasa (…) diplomats were bending over backward to shift the blame for the investigators' troubles to the United Nations.

A senior diplomat in Kinshasa, for example, castigated the team for its rejection of the Government's insistence that their inquiry be carried out only in the east.”
Two sites of interest: Mbandaka (Equateur Province) and Tingi Tingi (near Kisangani, the capital of Oriental Province)

The new forensic teams should pick up where the 1997 team left out: near and at the provincial capital of Mbandaka, which was at the time the freshest sites of mass killings (May 13, 1997) and where there is at least an identified Westerner as eyewitnesses: the Belgian plantation owner Antoine de Klerk, who was arrested at the time by Rwandan soldiers in a lame attempt to have him not talk to the UN forensic team, and who can’t be accused of “Hutu propaganda” by Kigali. In Wendji and Mbandaka, Rwandan troops sealed off the area for four days to carry out indiscriminately killings of at least 2,000 Hutu refugees in front of the local population with one instance of a small child’s skull smashed against a tree because one Congolese villager, who had found him playing dead under his dead parents, wanted to take him home.

There are also Western identifiable eyewitnesses of the Tingi Tingi massacres. According to the same New York Times report by McKinley and French cited earlier : “On March 2, [1997], according to relief officials, Western diplomats and Hutu refugees, Rwandan-backed units of Mr. Kabila's army launched a full-scale assault on the refugee camp at Tingi Tingi, sending the population, which had swollen to well over 150,000, fleeing westward yet again.”

At those sites, eyewitnesses have reported that Rwandan troops had tried to dispose of the evidence, and in once instance, in Tingi Tingi, about 200 kilometers southeast of Kisangani, even attempted to cremate some of the bodies. But with the help of the local communities, investigators will still be able to find and access sites of mass graves, as the ones uncovered this year in eastern Congo---though there were countless victims that drowned or whose bodies were dumped into the Congo River.

One hopes that this new UNHCR investigation will not only reestablish the historical records of one of the most systematic ethnic cleansings on African continent but also result in practical follow-ups at the International Criminal Court with indictments at the rulers of the ethno-fascist dictatorship in Rwanda (incidentally, the exact mirror of the previous regime in that country) and their proxies in the DRC for these crimes against humanity---as well as lay bare to its gruesome skeleton the morally cynical travesty of the punctual indignations the Rwandan government voice whenever rights organizations would voice their rightful concerns over these still unpunished atrocities.

As one Western aid worker still active in the African Great Lakes region this past week told a reporter of the London daily The Guardian in an article dealing with this renewed UN probe in the Congo: “To this day I have a hard time stomaching the Rwandan genocide propaganda and those who hold up the current regime as a model for all of central Africa”
Posté par Alex Engwete à 11:28 - Commentaires
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, May 28, 2011

In 2009 Oprah Organized a Surprise to a Rwandan Refugee Family Reunion of its Kind

Clementine and Wamariya Family Reunion at Oprah Show

 Wamariya Family Reunion

From Oprah Show 2009
Many viewers will never forget Clemantine and Claire Wamariya , sisters who escaped the Rwandan genocide. When the Tutsi Rebels attacked Rwanda Wwamariya was 6 years old. After witnessing the murder of family members perpetrated by the RPF, they hid for 100 days and then spent six years in Hutu refugee camps across Africa . They didn't know if their parents were dead or alive, so in 2000, they immigrated to America.

The sisters continued to search for their loved ones, contacting the Red Cross, UNICEF and other organizations for assistance. Then, one day, an acquaintance told Clemantine and Claire the news they hoped to hear—their mother and father were alive.

The family reconnected over the phone, but Clemantine and Claire hadn't seen them in person since the genocide began 12 years earlier. As the girls stood onstage, Oprah announced that she'd flown their parents to Chicago for a surprise reunion. Tears streamed down the girls' cheeks as they embraced the family they thought they lost.

Watch the family's emotional reunion. Watch

Clemantine continues to thrive. She says she's doing a post-graduate year at a Connecticut boarding school before heading to Yale University. Her family is also doing well. "I have good news," she says. "The whole family—my dad, my mom, my sisters, all my siblings—are in the United States now, right in Chicago."
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Justice Delayed For Global Court, Ugandan Rebels Prove Tough Test; African Politics, Tactical Fights, Hamper Chief Prosecutor; No Trial Date in Sight Who Will Arrest Mr. Kony, Kagame, and Museveni?

Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, Entebbe, Ju...Image via Wikipedia
"In April 2004, nearly a year after Mr. Moreno-Ocampo floated the idea of a Congolese case, Congo President Joseph Kabila referred alleged war crimes within his nation to the ICC. Mr. Moreno-Ocampo set up a separate team to investigate atrocities there, which will likely involve reviewing Uganda's alleged support for Congolese militias. President Museveni of Uganda asked U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to block the Congo investigation, according to one person familiar with the matter..."


By JESS BREVIN
WALL STREET JOURNAL
June 8, 2006

THE HAGUE -- In August 2004, the International Criminal Court sent investigators to Uganda to gather evidence against a shadowy insurgency known as the Lord's Resistance Army.

It was precisely the kind of desperate case the world's first permanent war-crimes tribunal was set up in 2002 to prosecute, and court officials hoped to showcase a new brand of international justice. The Lord's Resistance had terrorized Uganda's Acholiland region with murders, rapes and child abductions. Over two decades, the insurgents had kidnapped more than 20,000 children and driven nearly two million people from their homes, the United Nations estimates.

But the ICC quickly discovered how difficult it can be to dispense justice in corners of the world where political, military and diplomatic forces have long failed to produce stability.

Seven months after ICC investigators arrived in Uganda, a delegation of Acholi tribal leaders came to the court's headquarters here with an unexpected plea: Drop the case.

Although the tribal leaders feared the Lord's Resistance and its messianic leader, Joseph Kony, they also were afraid that the ICC's vow to prosecute him left the rebel leadership little incentive to negotiate -- and every reason to fight on. Is the ICC "able to provide peace, or only justice?" asked David Onen Acana II, the paramount chief of the Acholi, during an interview last year at The Hague. "We want peace by any means."

The Uganda case, the ICC's first, has become a test of the fledging international court and its charismatic Argentine chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo. In January 2004, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo predicted arrests by year's end and a trial in 2005. But the ICC has no police force of its own, and its member states, including Britain, France and Germany, have shown no inclination to help Ugandan forces apprehend anyone. Today, not a single suspect is in custody and no trial date is in sight. To make matters worse, the unsealing of arrest warrants in October was followed by the killings of foreign aid workers in northern Uganda in apparent reprisal.

In recent weeks, Uganda's president, Yoweri Museveni, and Mr. Kony have engaged in an unprecedented public dialogue that threatens to cut the ICC out of the picture entirely. Mr. Museveni offered to shield Mr. Kony from prosecution should he surrender by July 31. And Mr. Kony, in a videotaped message, said he wanted peace.

Northern Ugandans displaced by the ongoing civil conflict have been resettled to government-controlled camps, sometimes forcibly.

"In Uganda, they have not done well," says William R. Pace, head of the Coalition for the International Criminal Court, which promoted the creation of the tribunal and continues to serve as an independent adviser. "I think there's blame on all sides."

Mr. Moreno-Ocampo says the court has suffered from growing pains, and that criticism and setbacks are inevitable, given its unprecedented mission. "It's like assembling the airplane, recruiting the crew and taking off," he says.

The ICC was established as an independent international tribunal, a court of last resort for humanity's worst crimes. One hundred nations, including Uganda, are members, providing funding and electing the court's judges. The U.S. isn't among them. The Bush administration contends the court's charter lacks safeguards against prosecuting Americans for political reasons.

RISING TENSIONS
Thus far, the court has struggled to handle multiple investigations on a lean budget. As lawyers from different legal systems try to work together under an untested code of international criminal law, there have been disputes within the ICC over such basic questions as which incidents to review and whether prosecutors or judges are ultimately in charge of investigations. The court has squabbled with some member states over priorities and hiring decisions. And tensions have developed with some of the human-rights organizations that nursed the court into existence and now feel shut out.

The ICC traces its roots to the international tribunal at Nuremberg that tried Nazi war criminals after World War II. Nuremberg led to U.N. proposals for a permanent successor court, but the campaign stalled during the Cold War. In 1993, the U.N. Security Council established a tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, followed by additional ad hoc courts for Rwanda, East Timor, Sierra Leone and Cambodia. Human-rights groups argued that a single permanent court to handle future cases would be more effective and less expensive.

In 1998, a U.N. conference in Rome drafted a treaty for the ICC. Thanks to strong European support, the treaty garnered the required ratifications from at least 60 nations. The court's member countries quickly elected 18 judges. Settling on a chief prosecutor, who serves a single nine-year term, took longer. After several candidates dropped out for personal or political reasons, the post went to Mr. Moreno-Ocampo in 2003.

In Argentina, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo, 54 years old, is a legal celebrity. From a military family, he gained fame in the 1980s for prosecuting Argentina's deposed junta. "His family thought he was a traitor. They stopped talking to him," says Hector Timerman, a former dissident journalist and now the Argentine consul general in New York. Supporters of the junta threatened to kill Mr. Moreno-Ocampo and his children, Mr. Timerman says.

Mr. Moreno-Ocampo created an anticorruption advocacy group and hosted a television program on the law. He defended Mr. Timerman and his father, the late journalist Jacobo Timerman, from lawsuits filed by powerful figures, including former President Carlos Menem. Later, he represented wealthy clients in disputes over family assets, filed shareholder suits and consulted on corporate-accountability issues. He was a visiting professor at Harvard and Stanford. Today, "he's probably the best-known lawyer in Argentina," Mr. Timerman says. "Every young law student wants to be Moreno-Ocampo."

Mr. Moreno-Ocampo says he took office aware of the shortcomings of prior U.N. tribunals, which have been criticized for their slow pace and high cost. "This will be a sexy court," he said in an interview last year. The court aims to bring a different case each year, he said, and to televise them across the globe from the ICC's high-tech courtroom. The goal: swift justice that is comprehensible to often-uneducated victim populations.

The ICC treaty, known as the Rome Statute, gives the court jurisdiction only over "the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole." The statute specified genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and "aggression" -- once a future diplomatic conference agreed upon a definition for that term. Anything that happened prior to July 1, 2002, was off limits. Unless the U.N. Security Council referred a case, the ICC could act only within its member nations, and only if one of them requested ICC action, or if the court determined that a member government was "unwilling or unable genuinely" to address a suspected crime. Even then, the Security Council could vote to block an ICC case for a renewable one-year period.

SONG AND DANCE
At a restaurant in The Hague, Cecilia Otim-Ogwal, a member of the Ugandan Parliament, leads a delegation of Ugandan tribal leaders and their host, ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, in traditional song. See the video. Credit: Jess Bravin

RealPlayer: Player required

At a July 2003 news conference, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo announced out of the blue that he "believed" atrocities in Congo, a member state formerly known as Zaire, could qualify for an ICC investigation. He had provided no advance warning to Congo's government or to any other member countries. "Diplomats make a deal before they speak publicly," says Mr. Moreno-Ocampo. "But I am not a diplomat."

Mr. Moreno-Ocampo didn't follow up with an immediate investigation. But his remarks worried Congo's neighbor, Uganda, which Congo had accused of invading and destabilizing its eastern territory. An attorney for Uganda met with Mr. Moreno-Ocampo in 2003 to deny his government was involved in atrocities in Congo, according to someone familiar with the matter. Discussion turned to Uganda and the Lord's Resistance. Eventually, an agreement emerged for Uganda to refer that matter to the ICC. Uganda's government saw the deal as a way to gain an international ally in its campaign against the Lord's Resistance.

Mr. Moreno-Ocampo planned to announce the agreement in a joint news conference with Uganda's President Museveni. But several ICC staff members objected to Mr. Moreno-Ocampo appearing publicly with Mr. Museveni, citing the Ugandan government's reputed involvement in atrocities in eastern Congo, according to one court official. ICC investigations chief Serge Brammertz, a Belgian career prosecutor, "was going bananas telling Luis not to do this, and he did it anyway," according to the ICC official. Mr. Moreno-Ocampo appeared with Mr. Museveni at a news conference in London. Mr. Brammertz, who is on leave from the ICC to handle an unrelated case, couldn't be reached for comment. Mr. Moreno-Ocampo declines to discuss internal deliberations, but says it was vital to get the Ugandan president's cooperation.

The prosecutor says he had never heard of Mr. Kony before arriving at the ICC. To the extent Mr. Kony's opaque ideology can be discerned, the self-described prophet seeks to impose on Uganda his own interpretation of the Ten Commandments. Mr. Kony built his insurgency by raiding villages to kidnap children, then indoctrinating them into his rebel army, sometimes after forcing them to kill their own parents, according to the U.N., human-rights groups and ICC investigators.

Raised in the bush to become fighters, porters or concubines, Mr. Kony's captives then abducted more children to replenish the ranks. "The victims become perpetrators," says Christine Chung, a former assistant U.S. attorney from New York hired by Mr. Moreno-Ocampo to try the case.

A recent U.N. security assessment reviewed by The Wall Street Journal describes Mr. Kony as a "pathological liar" who "believes his own myth" and "shows traits of both a narcissistic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder." Mr. Kony is "incredibly difficult to deal with," the report says, in part because "he has no conscience whatsoever."

'I KNOW MY FATE'

Betty Bigombe, a former Ugandan cabinet minister who has held sporadic peace negotiations with the Lord's Resistance since the early 1990s, is among the few outsiders with whom Mr. Kony speaks. To his followers, he is a god, interpreting dreams, administering drugs, issuing commands on a whim, she says. But "sometimes he talks a lot of sense," she says. "One day I was talking to him, not too long ago, and he said, 'I know my fate. I have one of three options. One is death, one is prison, the other one is exile.' " Efforts to reach Mr. Kony through Ms. Bigombe were unsuccessful.

MORE ON THE ICC
Read the full text of the Rome Statute, the ICC treaty that gives the court jurisdiction only over "the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a hole."

See a video report on the swearing-in ceremony for ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo at the Peace Palace in The Hague.

See Interpol's "Red Notices" or wanted bulletins for the top commanders of the Lord's Resistance Army: Ugandans Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti, Raska Lukwiya, Okot Odhiambo, Dominic Ongwen. Plus, general information on Interpol's bulletins.
Enhanced by Zemanta

STOP KILLING RWANDANS OR RESIGN: RWANDA NATIONAL CONGRESS (RNC) TELLS PRESIDENT KAGAME

CALLS UPON THE USA AND UK TO SUPPORT PEACEFUL AND DEMOCRATIC REFORMS IN RWANDA. Adapted from NGONews Africa
In a not so rare confession of intent to commit murder, the Rwanda Patriotic Front-owned and Rwanda Intelligence-run The New Times , May 3, 2011, in an opinion titled “ Osama bin Laden’s Lessons for Local Terrorists”, opens with ominously familiar warning to all pro-democracy voices and Rwandans in general: “ You can run. You can hide. But you won’t escape. Osama bin Laden learnt the lesson of this simple truth”. In short, Kagame is telling Rwandans, “ accept my rule and keep quiet, or else I will kill you, as I have killed many others..”
 Excerpts from The New Times article :
“In Rwanda we have our own criminals and terrorists sheltering in foreign countries. What has happened to Osama bin Laden should serve as notice to them that they cannot hide forever. Justice, in whatever form, will catch up with them.
 “Other politicians, like Victoire Ingabire and Deo Mushayidi, who have tried to use terrorism to get to power now know the perils of that route and, unless they are idiots, are unlikely to advise anyone to go the same way.”
“But there will always be idiots for whom history has no lessons. The group that is now known as the Gang of Four ( Kayumba Nyamwasa, Gerald Gahima, Patrick Karegeya and Theogene Rudasingwa) all of whom have committed crimes ranging from abuse of office to treason are trying to reinvent themselves as political saviours of Rwandans. The indication that they have learnt nothing is that they have chosen the terrorist route to political power”….The criminal quartet and other unsavoury characters to whom they are allied in a terrorist enterprise will soon find out that the jungles of foreign countries and villas in upmarket areas of foreign capitals are not very safe.”
“They can run and hide, but will run out of options and then their actions will catch up with them”
There is little or no surprise that President Kagame and his regime would, once again, turn to assassination, intimidation and insults in dealing with Rwandan citizens demanding peaceful and democratic change in their motherland. To Kagame, critics in academia, civil society, media and members of the political opposition are all genocidaires, revisionists, divisionists, terrorists, idiots, gangs, unsavoury characters and criminals who should be hunted and killed like Osama bin Laden. What is surprising is that Kigali regime’s previously secret policy of killing real or imagined opponents within and outside Rwanda has now become official open policy. The regime’s criminal nature, its decadence, arrogance and incredible impunity is alarmingly turning uglier, blatant and scandalous.
Osama bin Laden’s death should be a teachable moment to all humanity. Unfortunately, like all tyrannical regimes, Kagame’s regime is both unwilling and incapable of deriving the right lessons from an event like this, the foremost of which is that those who live by the sword die by the sword. On the African continent and the world at large, no other ruler’s profile comes close to resembling bin Laden’s as President Kagame’s. Kagame’s endless list of victims, itself a who is who in Rwanda and the Great Lakes region, probably is by far longer than bin Laden’s, and includes, over a decade and half, his comrades-in-arms, politicians, military officers, children, men, women, and other leaders in Rwanda and neighboring countries. The ghosts of these innocent victims ceaselessly haunt him and have turned him into a paranoid serial killer and sleepless character who must not rest till he finds another victim. If he was a good student of history, he would know that killing citizens has never saved dictators. On the contrary, such unparalleled onslaught on citizens’ fundamental rights and yearning for freedom makes Rwandans ever more courageous to resist Kagame’s regime. Rwandans firmly believe that Kagame and the RPF regime he has criminalized will one day be caught up with justice in the courts of law. Unlike him, however, RNC and other pro-democracy are not calling for his death. Killing people is not the RNC way. It is the Kagame  way.  RNC and the majority of Rwandans are trying to change, and change for good, this violent way that disregards the dignity and worth a Rwandan, by peaceful and democratic means.
The Rwanda National Congress calls upon President Kagame to resign immediately if he cannot stop killing, jailing and exiling innocent citizens. Rwandans need a leader who has moral integrity, who is honest, who can help them talk to each other truthfully as a genuine way to reconcile and heal. Rwandans need a leader who helps them overcome fear so as to build a shared future together. Out of the 11 million Rwandans in and outside our Rwanda, there are those who can surely lead us out of the present dangerous political impasse. Clearly, Kagame is not that leader. He has selfishly gambled away enough of Rwandans’ and international goodwill.
RNC further calls upon the United States and the U.K. Governments, and the rest of the international community, to use the leverage of their strong links with the government of Rwanda to support democratic change and respect for fundamental human rights by the state institutions. We recommend the following measures are necessary to convey an unequivocal message to the Government of Rwanda that it must carry out reforms to ensure respect of the legitimate demands of the citizens of Rwanda for freedom:
(a) Calling for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners;
(b) Demanding an end to persecution (including arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture;
involuntary disappearances and extra-judicial killings) of government opponents and critics and their relatives;
(c) An end to the practice of channeling the development assistance directly into budget support, and conditioning the development assistance that the UK, USA and international community provide to the Rwanda government on political reforms, including opening up political space;
(d) Using regional and United Nations human rights mechanisms to ensure that President
Kagame and his security officials are held accountable for gross human rights violations
that are committed against innocent citizens;
(e) Encouraging the government of Rwanda to agree to a comprehensive and unconditional dialogue with the opposition on ways for resolving the political impasse, engulfing Rwanda;
f) Calling on the United Nations, the African Union, UNHCR, the international community and member states to prevent the impending application of the cessation clause (end of 2011) for the Rwandan refugees, and instead support creating an enabling environment within Rwanda for their voluntary and peaceful repatriation; and,
g) Supporting a political and peaceful process for ending the long standing DRC-based rebellion by Rwandan armed groups.
by Dr.  Theogene Rudasingwa
 Submitted by: Jennifer Fierberg, MSW
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, January 4, 2011

US embassy cables: Abysmal security at a Congolese nuclear centre

From the Guardian
CO N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KINSHASA 001410SIPDIS
    SIPDIS EO 12958 DECL: 09/06/2016 TAGS ENRG, EMIN, ETRD, KGIT, PREL, PGOV, IAEA, CG SUBJECT: SECURITY AT THE DRC'S NUCLEAR RESEARCH CENTER REF: A. KINSHASA 1271 B. KINSHASA 1272 C. KINSHASA 1392 Classified By: EconOff DPopovich for reasons 1.4 b/d/e.
    Summary
    1. A US visit to a nuclear research centre in Kinshasa founds that security has not improved despite a series of thefts. Key passage highlighted in yellow.

    1. (C) Summary. Four EmbOffs and an Econ LES toured the Kinshasa Nuclear Research Center (CREN-K) July 27 to assess security and determine its needs. CREN-K houses the DRC's two nuclear reactors, neither of which functions, although staff continue to conduct nuclear-related research and teaching at the facility. External and internal security is poor, leaving the facility vulnerable to theft. The GDRC needs international assistance to secure the facility and its nuclear materials. End Summary. Physical Layout --------------- 2. (U) July 27, Professor Fortunat Lumu Badimbayi-Matu (Lumu), the Director of CREN-K and the DRC's Atomic Energy Commission, gave four Emboffs and an Econ LES a tour of CREN-K's facility, the location of the DRC's two nuclear reactors (reftels A, B, C). CRENK-K is on approximately five acres of land on the edge of the University of Kinshasa campus, a 45 minute to one hour drive from downtown. The facility is composed of approximately five buildings. One building houses one reactor, one houses the second reactor and one acts as a small nuclear waste storage room. The remaining buildings are used as offices, research laboratories and classrooms. Nuclear Material ---------------- 3. (C) The DRC's two nuclear reactors consist of a 1959 Triga I reactor and a 1972 Triga II reactor. Neither functions. The Triga I reactor was retired in 1970, and the Triga II reactor ceased functioning in 1992 when the reactor's control center experienced an electrical problem that made it impossible to control. CREN-K also has 138 nuclear fuel rods (LEU). (Note: CREN-K originally had 140 fuel rods. Two of these, however, were stolen by unidentified thieves in 1998. Italian authorities later recovered one of these fuel rods from the Italian Mafia in Rome, who were allegedly trying to sell it to unidentified buyers in the Middle-East. The second fuel rod has never been found. End note.) 56 fuel rods are stored in the heavy water of the Triga I reactor, 74 are stored in the heavy water of the Triga II reactor. Nine others have never been used and are stored in a separate room. 4. (C) According to Lumu, the total amount of radioactive material in the Triga II reactor consists of 10.5 kilograms of non-enriched uranium (U-238) and 5.1 kilograms of enriched uranium (U-235, enriched to 20 percent). Lumu did not provide information about Triga I. 5. (C) A CREN-K technician told EconOff that the facility has approximately 23 kilograms of nuclear waste, stored in the nuclear waste storage building in four 50 gallon drums. It consists of Radium 226, neutron sources (nfi) and Cesium 137. Security -------- 6. (C) A fence approximately six feet high surrounds some of CREN-K. The fence is constructed of cement in some places and chain-link in others. The fence is not lit at night, has no razor-wire across the top, and is not monitored by video surveillance. There is also no cleared buffer zone between it and the surrounding vegetation. There are numerous holes in the fence, and large gaps where the fence was missing altogether. University of Kinshasa students frequently walk through the fence to cut across CREN-K, and subsistence farmers grow manioc on the facility next to the nuclear waste storage building. (Note: In mid March 2006, an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) contractor detected elevated levels of radiation in this manioc plot using a Geiger counter. End note.) No fence separates the nuclear waste storage building and the University of Kinshasa's women's dormitory. The two buildings sit approximately 300 meters apart, and one can walk freely from one to the other across the manioc field. KINSHASA 00001410 002 OF 002 7. (C) Three security officers guard CREN-K at any one time. A team of 21 security guards, which consists of nine DRC police officers and 12 private security guards, rotate shifts 24 hours a day, 365 days per year. The guards usually stand at one of two control points of entry to the facility: the main drive-in gate or the pedestrian entrance. XXXXXXXXXXXX, some are elderly, and some are occasionally caught sleeping on the job. XXXXXXXXXXXX, and both groups lack training. 8. (C) None of CREN-K's buildings have sophisticated locks, intrusion alarms, motion detectors or video surveillance systems. Once inside the facility, no one controls the entrance to the nuclear reactor, although a key is required to enter the room. The fuel rod storage room where the nine unused fuel rods are stored was not locked, and the fuel rods are not kept in a separate locked container. 9. (C) The nuclear waste storage building, which is a separate structure approximately 500 meters from the main building, is approximately 15 square meters. It was constructed of about 12 inch thick bricks, and has one iron door and several small windows near the roof. The door was locked with a standard padlock. Once through this door, there was another metal gate inside the entrance. The gate was also locked, but it was only about eight feet high, and did not reach the 16 foot high ceiling, making it possible for someone to climb over it. Beyond the metal gate is a single room approximately 32 square feet where the four 50 gallon drums containing the nuclear waste is stored against a northern wall. CREN-K Personnel ---------------- 10. (C) The DRC'S General Atomic Energy Commission (CGEA), which is under the Ministry of Science and Technology, governs CREN-K. CGEA has two divisions: technical and administrative. The technical division is responsible for running the nuclear reactor, and it is divided into four departments: Technology, Science, Biology and Nuclear Medicine. approximately 180 people work at CREN-K, about 50 of whom are scientists, 60 of whom are technicians and 70 who serve as administrative officers. According to a facility technician, their salaries range from USD 40 to 150 per month - (comment: a substantial vulnerability for the facility). Some senior officials include: -- Professor Fortunat Lumu Badimbayi-Matu, CGEA Commissioner -- Alphune Tshisonolo Tshisho, Senior Nuclear Scientist -- Dieudonne Konbele, Chief of the Technical Department -- Leonard Makontshi Woto, Radiation Control Inspector 11. (C) While neither the Triga I or Triga II reactors function, CREN-K's nuclear scientists continue to work. They conduct agricultural research (such as irradiating and mutating corn), study nuclear medicine, produce isotopes, analyze and identify neutron material, study radiography and teach University of Kinshasa students physics and nuclear science. 12. (C) Professor Lumu, who runs the facility, told Emboffs he wants to restart the nuclear reactor. Lumu has been lobbying the international community to provide the necessary funds and technology to do this. Lumu said he plans to use the reactor to study x-ray detraction, radiology, agronomy, gamma irradiation, nuclear medicine, environmental science and radiation protection. Comment ------- 13. (C) Because CREN-K's security is poor, it is relatively easy for someone to break into the nuclear reactor building or the nuclear waste storage building and steal rods or nuclear waste, with no greater tool than a lock cutter. It would also be feasible to pay a CREN-K employee to steal nuclear material. It is imperative that the international community find a way to help better secure the facility, even if GDRC remains unwilling to give up its fuel rods. Priority funding needs are new fencing, proper nuclear waste storage and disposal and security training. End comment. MEECE
Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, December 31, 2010

Somalia: Obama's Unholy Alliance With Yoweri Museveni

[Black Star News Editorial]

If  New Year's prayers are answered, then the United States must stop bleeding the people of Somalia.

The U.S. must abandon its current approach to the Somalia tragedy. Washington must explore a genuine solution to end Somalia's decades of warfare and political paralyses.

Currently the U.S. underwrites a fictitious government in Mogadishu kept in place by Ugandan soldiers, sent there on behalf of the U.S. by dictator, Gen. Yoweri K. Museveni, who is without a doubt an unindicted war criminal.

Washington finds this relationship beneficial because by Uganda propping up the fictitious Mogadishu government, the U.S. believes Somalia is secured from being overtaken as a haven by Al-Qaeda, the United States' avowed foe. The U.S. views Somalia as Africa's Afghanistan. Nothing could be further from the truth.

For Gen. Museveni, the relationship is invaluable for many reasons: it prevents the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor, Luis Moreno Ocampo, from indicting him for the well documented war crimes his army committed in the DR Congo, on which the World Court found Uganda liable and awarded Congo $10 billion, or from unsealing the indictment if one already exists; it prevents Ocampo from indicting Museveni for well documented crimes against humanity committed by his army and generals, on his orders, in the northern part of Uganda; it provides him with the aura of international legitimacy, by being associated with President Barack Obama, even when his popularity continues to erode domestically as Uganda approaches a presidential election in February; and, it provides sustenance, in the form of military materiel and money, for his armed forces--which army he has primarily used to suppress domestic dissent and to commit wars of aggression against Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and now the Central African Republic.

The United States' rationale for having Uganda act as its hired mercenary army is preposterous and actually counters its own stated policy objectives. The fictitious Somalia government currently holds only a few blocks of Mogadishu, the capital. This means that since it's unable to expand its writ beyond this area, Somalia is actually fertile ground to become a haven for Al-Qaeda.

Therefore, the longer the U.S. pursues this strategically suicidal Somalia policy, the longer the crisis lasts, and with it, the suffering of the Somali people. Media accounts never refer to Somalia's civilians deaths, possibly tens of thousands--first through the U.S.-sponsored Ethiopian invasion, through starvation and diseases caused by the recurrent mass dislocations of population, and through the reckless shelling by Ugandan soldiers.

How can the United States continue to underwrite a policy that is actually contributing to the deaths of Somalians, and to the continued destruction of their country?

And what of the war crimes?
In addition to the indiscriminate shelling of Somalian civilians, it's been widely reported, including in corporate newspapers such as The New York Times that the fictitious Somali government employs child soldiers trained by Uganda --some of whom are as young as 11 years old-- to defend the few blocks it now controls.

This comes as no surprise to people who have followed Gen. Museveni's M.O. for years; he employed child soldiers in his own successful insurgency in Uganda. Of course, the use of children in war is prohibited by international law; the Somalian children are being paid with U.S. taxpayers money, which means the Obama administration is actually an accomplice to war crimes.

Fact is the Ugandan army: has not been able to check, let alone defeat the forces fighting against the fictitious Mogadishu government; it has not restored peace to any part of Somalia; it has not protected Somalians against violence from the armed militias; and, it has certainly not made Somalia a better country for its citizens.

It was a tall order--to ask Uganda's president, using his army, to undertake in Somalia what he has not been able to accomplish in Uganda in 25 years in office as the United States' own ambassador in Kampala confided in his memos to Washington, which were revealed to the world, courtesy of Wiki leaks.

Will the United States reverse its Somalia policy in the New Year? Not judging by the latest reports that the United Nations Security Council has okayed thousands of more troop reinforcement --surprise, surprise-- from Uganda, to Somalia.

Uganda's Gen. Museveni is an autocrat who is accountable to no one--his own regime's survival is predicate on continued anarchy in Somalia. The United States has a government that's supposedly accountable to Congress and to the electorate. What Somalia needs is an international conference that involves all major stakeholders, military, political, and civil society.

Contrary to the global media misrepresentation, Somalians are actually some of the most industrious, entrepreneurial, and intellectual people in all of Africa. If such a conference were sponsored by the international community, Somalians could form a legitimate interim regime--not the fictitious and discredited government now imposed on Somalia by the United States and Uganda.

African countries, including those with resources, such as South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana, Egypt, and Libya, might then be more inclined to contribute money and soldiers to a genuine African Union peace keeping force, with a clear mandate and rules of engagement, to ensure the security, while Somalia trains a police force. Perhaps Somalians may even be persuaded to lay down their weapons if they see that the world is genuinely interested in a comprehensive peace and recovery program.

So long as Somalia remains a mere arena for Washington's proxy war with Al-Qaeda, it will in fact remain a haven for all sorts of lawless militias--contributing to more and more Somalian deaths.

Gen. Museveni does not care; but what about President Barack Obama?

"Speaking Truth To Empower."

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, December 12, 2010

War Crimes in the Congo by Laurent Nkunda and Paul Kagame

Congo News Agency - October 30, 2010
Laurent Nkunda and Paul Kagame
According to the International Rescue Committee, more than 5,400,000 Congolese civilians have died due to war during the last ten years. Most of these deaths have occurred in eastern Congo where rebel leader Laurent Nkunda continues to wage a resources war against a democratically elected and internationally recognized government. Laurent Nkunda alleges that he is protecting the minority Tutsi ethnic group against remnants of the Rwandan Hutu army that fled to Congo after the Rwandan genocide in 1994.
If Tutsis are under attack in the Congo then there must be a widespread conspiracy not to report these attacks by the local media, the Rwandan media, the United Nations peacekeeping mission in Congo (MONUC), and the international media, at least for the last five years. The fact is that attacks against Congolese of all ethnic groups are a daily occurrence in the region. Laurent Nkunda's troops are responsible for most of these attacks.
Not only have countless civilians lost their lives, hundreds of thousands of Congolese women have been raped by rebels and militiamen in an epidemic that has reached apocalyptic proportions. Tutsis have not been singled out for attacks. Congolese have certainly not attacked Tutsis in Congo. But, they are paying the high price of an unjust and immoral war imposed on them by the Rwandan government and its local agents.
One of the enduring mysteries of the conflict in eastern Congo is why have more than 5,400,000 innocent Congolese civilians had to die at no fault of their own. There are more than 300 ethnic groups in the Congo. Tutsi villages are mainly found in the two Kivu provinces. Tutsis are a small minority in North and South Kivu. Is one ethnic group superior to all other 300 ethnic groups present in the Congo? Should one ethnic group have special dispensations to entertain a war that continues to kill countless civilians, a war that continues to cause tens of thousands of women to be raped, and the displacement of more than 1,000,000 civilians?
Congolese did not invite and have never welcomed the Rwandan Hutu militiamen to their country. Much to the contrary, Congo has no interest and absolutely nothing to gain by their presence. Congolese citizens would like nothing more than to see all remaining Hutus go back to Rwanda. Paul Kagame wants them to stay in Congo. He has frustrated all attempts by the Congolese government and the international community to repatriate them back to their country. He failed to finish them off when he had tens of thousands of his troops occupying the region, before "withdrawing" some of them under international pressure in 2003 and leaving the job to Laurent Nkunda.
Some have bought into the pretext of an endangered Tutsi minority in Congo. They never fail to mention that Laurent Nkunda is supposedly fighting to protect "his people". They have failed to question his true motives which are to occupy the mineral-rich North-Kivu province, pillage its resources, and act as a proxy army in eastern Congo for the Tutsi-led Rwandan government in Kigali. Kagame wants a foothold in eastern Congo so his country can continue to benefit from the pillaging and exporting of minerals such as Columbite-Tantalite (Coltan). Many experts on the region agree today that resources are the true reason why Laurent Nkunda continues to create chaos in the region with the help of Paul Kagame.
What's shocking is that some in the media have no shame in calling and joking with the rebel leader in interviews while he continues to be the main reason why more than 1,000 people are dying per day in Congo, 600 of them children. These journalists should think twice before cozying up to a person that will go down in history as a war criminal and mass murderer alongside Radovan Karadzic and Adolph Hitler.
Laurent Nkunda is a war criminal. The Congolese government issued an international arrest warrant against him for war crimes in 2005. Human Rights Watch has been calling for his arrest for war crimes since February of 2006. He is on a UN Sanctions List for breaches of the UN arms embargo in the DRC. On October 31, 2006 U.S. President George W. Bush signed Executive Order 13413 freezing his assets for contributing to the conflict in the Congo.
Laurent Nkunda belongs in a prison cell at The Hague along with his acolyte Bosco Ntaganda, who is being sought under an unrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and unsealed on April, 28 2008. Laurent Nkunda is also under investigation by the ICC. Many Congolese are wondering why there has not yet been an indictment of Laurent Nkunda while the court was quick to issue one against former Congolese vice-president Jean-Pierre Bemba for crimes that while equally important and indefensible, pale in comparison against those of Laurent Nkunda and his troops.
Laurent Nkunda's boss Paul Kagame was indicted on November 17, 2006 by then French magistrate in charge of counter-terrorism affairs Jean-Louis Bruguière. He is accused in the indictment of ordering the attack on the plane carrying then Rwandan President, Juvenal Habyarimana and his counterpart Cyprien Ntaryamira of Burundi. Their deaths led to the genocide of an estimated 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus. Judge Fernando Andreou Merelles of the Spanish Central Instruction Court issued indictments against 40 senior officers of the Rwanda Defense Forces formerly of the Rwanda Patriotic Army for committing mass killings after the 1994 Rwanda Genocide. He said he also has evidence against Paul Kagame who only escaped indictment because he is a sitting president.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Obama’s Congo Moment: Genocide, the U.N. Report and Senate Bill 2125


Source: www.global research.ca

Obama’s Congo Moment: Genocide, the U.N. Report and Senate Bill 2125

13 November 2010 Comments (0) Print This Post Print This Post
The official Oct. 1 release of the U.N. Report on Human Rights Abuses in the Democratic Republic of Congo, 1993-2003, documenting the Rwandan and Ugandan armies’ massacres of Rwandan Hutu refugees and Congolese Hutus in the Democratic Republic of Congo, should be a defining moment for President Barack Obama. How will the USA’s first African American president respond to the detailed and widely publicized U.N. documentation of genocide in the heart of Africa, committed by the USA’s longstanding military proxies, the armies of Rwandan President Paul Kagame and Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni?
Few Americans realize that the Rwandan and Ugandan armies are armed and trained by the U.S. or that the U.S. military uses both countries as staging grounds, but they may learn about it now.
Few realize either that the sole piece of legislation that President Obama shepherded into law on his own, as a Senator, was S.B. 2125, the Obama Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act of 2006, in which, in Section 101(3), he quoted USAID:
“Given its size, population, and resources, the Congo is an important player in Africa and of long-term interest to the United States.”
Indeed. In 1982, the Congressional Budget Office’s “Cobalt: Policy Options for a Strategic Mineral” noted that cobalt alloys are critical to the aerospace and weapons industries, that the U.S. has no cobalt worth mining, that 64 percent of the world’s cobalt reserves are in the Katanga Copper Belt running from southeastern Congo into northern Zambia and that control of the region is therefore critical to the U.S. ability to manufacture for war.
Foreign powers and corporations’ determination to control Congo’s cobalt and the rest of its dense mineral resources has made the Congo conflict the most lethal since World War II.
Section 101(5) and (6) of Obama’s 2006 Congo legislation reads:
“(5) The most recent war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which erupted in 1998, spawned some of the world’s worst human rights atrocities and drew in six neighboring countries.
“(6) Despite the conclusion of a peace agreement and subsequent withdrawal of foreign forces in 2003, both the real and perceived presence of armed groups hostile to the Governments of Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi continue to serve as a major source of regional instability and an apparent pretext for continued interference in the Democratic Republic of the Congo by its neighbors [Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi].”
What Obama identified as the “real and perceived presence of armed groups hostile to the Governments of Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi” was, most of all, the real and perceived presence of “Hutu militias.” They were indeed the “pretext” for the predominantly Tutsi Rwandan Patriotic Army’s massacres of Hutu civilians, Rwandan Hutu refugees and Congolese Hutus, with the help of the Ugandan People’s Defence Force – massacres now documented in the U.N. report leaked to Le Monde on Aug. 26, then officially released Oct. 1.
Since Obama described the militias as “apparent pretext for continued interference” in 2006, we can assume that he understood them as such on his Inauguration Day, Jan. 20, 2009, when Rwandan troops again moved into Congo. On that day, world headlines, alongside those he himself was making, included “Rwandan Troops enter D.R. Congo to hunt Hutu militias” (Telegraph), “Rwandan troops enter Congo to hunt Hutu rebels” (BBC) and “Rwandan troops enter Kivu to hunt Hutu rebels” (Radio France International).
On the same day, the Christian Science Monitor, in “Rwandan Troops enter Democratic Republic of the Congo,” reproduced the pretext that Obama had identified in S.B. 2125:
“Rwandan troops entered the Democratic Republic of Congo on Tuesday to tackle a Rwandan Hutu militia whose leaders are accused of taking part in the 1994 Rwandan genocide before fleeing to Congo.”
Since Obama understood the pretext in 2006, he no doubt understood it that day and no doubt understands it today, as Rwandan and Ugandan troops are rumored, once again, to be moving into Congo, despite international outcry about the U.N. report.
Hutu militias and other “rebel militias” in Congo can no longer serve as the devil, the eternal excuse or, as Obama said, the “apparent pretext for intervention in the Democratic Republic by Congo’s neighbors.” Most of all, they can no longer serve as the devil, the excuse and pretext for interventions by Paul Kagame, the general turned president and so long heroized as Rwanda’s savior, because Kagame’s own army’s massacres of Rwandan and Congolese Hutu civilians has now been documented in the U.N. report.
The leak and now the official release have finally magnified President, then-Senator, Obama’s obscure, still little known revision of the East-Central African story in his 2006 legislation, S.B. 2125, which then became Public Law 109-456.
Obama’s ‘Rwanda moment’?
John Prendergast and David Eggers, the ENOUGH Project’s tireless advocates for U.S. intervention in Sudan, suggested, in a New York Times op-ed that Obama’s “Rwanda moment,” like Bill Clinton’s in 1994, is now in Sudan, where, they say, Obama has a chance to do what Bill Clinton reputedly failed to do in Rwanda, intervene to stop genocide.
But Obama’s Rwanda, and Congo, moment is in Rwanda and Congo now, as the world reviews the U.N. report and Rwandan troops once again advance into Congo.
He doesn’t need to intervene but to stop intervening, by withdrawing the military support, weapons, training, logistics and intelligence for Kagame, support that has so long equaled intervention. If he did so, peace and human rights activists all over the world would stand behind him and the narrative revision that he quietly penned three years ago.
An Obama decision to stop supporting Kagame would go up against the last 30 years of Pentagon intervention in the Great Lakes Region of Africa, but the U.N. Report turns his 2006 narrative revision into an outright reversal – with the weight of the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights and growing international opinion behind it.
And Obama is the commander-in-chief, with absolute executive authority over the U.S. armed forces. Yes, he can, should he choose to.
This article was previously published in Global Research.
Written by Ann Garrison
Enhanced by Zemanta