Has Yar'Adua been bought out by Bush and AFRICOM?
After meeting with Bush at the White House, Nigeria's President Yar'Adua appears to have reversed direction and announced Nigeria is ready to "partner" with AFRICOM. To understand what partnership means, see my earlier post on how it works in the Philippines, and how that relates to AFRICOM. Partnership may provide the US with everything it wants and needs, both access and resources. I don't know what combination of bribes and threats were directed at Yar'Adua, but combinations of bribes and threats are how Bush and his cronies do business. The story was reported by This Day, and in allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Yar'Adua in White House, Ready to Partner U.S. On Africom.
President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua yesterday at the White House in Washington, D.C., United States (US) stated that Nigeria would partner the US/AFRICA Command (AFRICOM) on security on the continent.
The Council of States of which the President is Chairman, recently voiced opposition to the command.
Minister of Foreign Affairs, Chief Ojo Maduekwe, who is part of the President's delegation to the US had himself stated that Nigeria would not support the presence of US troops on African soil under the auspices of AFRICOM.
But at a press briefing at the Oval Office, with President George W. Bush in attendance, Yar'Adua made known his new position.
"We have discussed on security issues, security within Nigeria, the Niger Delta, the Gulf of Guinea and peace and security on the African continent. We shall partner AFRICOM to assist not only Nigeria but also the African continent to actualise its peace and security initiatives. It is an initiative to have standby forces in each of the regional economic groupings in Africa," said the President.
The President did not give details of the discussion on AFRICOM, such as whether Nigeria will be used as the Command's base, an issue that has emerged contentious in recent times.
But his support at the White House was a clear departure from the leaning of his administration on the issue.
As CareTaker at African Loft writes:
This disclosure is opposite of what was disclosed by the Nigerian government in November, and clearly contrary to general expectation of AfricanLoft users (See AfricanLoft debate on AFRICOM) and the Nigerian public.
And as Omotaylor writes in the comments:
It will be a grevious mistake in the long term if Nigeria i.e. Yaradua deviates from his earlier decision and partners with the US on AFRICOM. It will be interesting to hear in the near future his full explanation and reasoning behind changing his mind. Leaders are accountable to the people for when the problem starts, the people are the same that would suffer for it.
Again, referring to my earlier post, Bush's AFRICOM may not need much of a geographic headquarters to accomplish what it wants, if it can get enough African "partners".
Labels: Africa command, Africom, Bush administration, Nigeria
posted by Crossed Crocodiles at
12/15/2007 09:37:00 PM
8 Comments:
you are dead on w/ regarding this "partnership" concept.
yar'adua & the foreign minister maduekwe are now in damage control mode, trying to get you to believe that the president didn't say what he said at the white house press briefing. it was pretty clear that what yar'adua said was
"And we shall partner with AFRICOM to assist not only Nigeria, but also the African continent..."
and it's really interesting that the official white house transcript feigns hearing difficulties on the A-word -- they published it as
"And we shall partner with (inaudible) to assist not only Nigeria, but also the African continent..."
or that the usinfo propaganda article published that day recaping the visit failed to mention the topic of AFRICOM at all.
my take on this friday was that it's not necessarily that the great white godfather made yar'adua an offer that he couldn't refuse, but that they knew how to reel him in & he was willing to play along, in part for his own self-interest.
my initial reaction was that yar'adua was trading up political godfather's - trading up from obasanjo to uncle sam -- to protect his tenuous presidency. both abubakar & buhari are getting closer to having the elections nullified. i'm not saying that it is going to happen, but it's even less likely to now that the u.s. has yar'adua where they want him. no doubt they puffed up his ego very much during that visit. bush even called him "a strong leader", which must be code for somebody listening, since yar'adua has come under increasing criticism for being exactly the opposite.
anyway, stratfor's friday analysis, opposition to AFRICOM ends, concurred w/ this view that yar'adua played along:
Yaradua lifted his government's opposition to AFRICOM in return for U.S. political support that is expected to be used against his domestic political detractors. At home, opposition political parties are petitioning a constitutionally mandated elections tribunal for fresh elections to replace the April 29 polls which Nigerian opposition parties and international observers criticized as severely flawed.
that's not to say that the u.s. didn't pull out their big 'ole bag of tricks used to get what they want from representatives of other nations. lord knows it's a big bag & has been building since the territory of the united states was reduced from more than 500 nations to where we are today.
and yar'adua's defense since thursday it pretty lame.
on saturday, thisday online ran a followup article on
"The president’s ... clarification that the partnership with the US/African Command (AFRICON) does not translate to an acceptance of the command."
which states that
"The President claimed there was a misunderstanding of his comments at the White House on Thursday. It is a partnership, not an acceptance, he stressed."
how to interpret this? he's partnering w/ an entity he doesn't accept?
no. their tactic is to sell the public on the red herring that yar'adua is rejecting u.s. military bases in nigeria and u.s. control over nigerian military efforts.
as maduekwe told the press on saturday
"I can promise you that you will not see American soldiers or marines on the streets of Lagos or Abuja or anywhere in Nigeria running around with guns or a building with AFRICOM signpost on it."
well now, that's a bit misleading, isn't' it?
whatever went down inside the white house on thursday re AFRICOM has still to fully come out -- and so far the u.s. appears to be making sure that it doesn't -- which leaves us to speculate based on what the nigerian officials have publicly stated. and at this point it doesn't look good. yar'adua does not deny that he agreed to a partnership w/ AFRICOM, which makes explicit the fact that he accepts the operation of the u.s. combatant command on african soil.
what are the ramifications? it's bound to be extremely unpopular, which will carry over into yar'adua 's effectiveness as a leader. on the other hand, it may be the necessary catalyst to mobilize solid resistance, both to yar'adua in nigeria, and AFRICOM on the continent. it's still too early to tell.
By
Anonymous, at 3:05 AM, December 16, 2007
Something along the lines of they knew how to reel him in & he was willing to play along, in part for his own self-interest. is what I was guessing. Though I didn't think about trading up godfathers, that sounds entirely likely.
I wrote up a slightly shorter version of what partnering means for the African Loft. I just submitted it, so I don't know if they will publish it or not.
The pictures, and especially the comments at the Nigerian Village Square are worth noting.
And very funny about the hearing difficulties and the A word. It really is unpopular and they know it.
I'm under the impression that Maduekwe is far less supportive of Africom than Yar'Adua, maybe openly hostile. I can't tell what is posturing and what is conviction in Maduekwe's case. He is still part of the government though, and his words are certainly disingenuous.
By
Crossed Crocodiles, at 7:59 PM, December 16, 2007
yea, it's still hard to read what's gone down. i do think they're in damage-control mode, since they appear to be only operating from a defensive stance on the issue. the opposition is only gaining ammo.
monday's this day online quotes maduekwe as saying on sunday that
"Nigeria's position on AFRICOM remains that African governments have the sovereign responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security on the continent"
and
"President Yar'Adua's statement on the proposed AFRICOM is consistent with Nigeria's well-known position on the necessity for Africa to avail itself of opportunities for enhanced capacity for the promotion of peace and security in Africa"
this sorta sounds like it fits right into AFRICOM's promotional pitch to africa -- 'we don't want to do your job for you, we want to help you help yourselves'.
great idea, if it were true, but there is no such thing as a strictly benevolent imperialist operating in the interest of others.
so when did nigeria develop plans for creating their own version of AFRICOM? i don't recall hearing any talk about this previously.
in that this day online article from friday, yar'adua stated
"I did not accept AFRICOM in my discussions with Bush. I asked for assistance and told Bush that we have our plans to establish bases for African countries. We asked for training on weapons and training to establish our bases to be managed by our people.”
“Seven countries in the Gulf of Guinea will be involved,” he stated. The president said he asked for training from the US government. The US insisted it can only render help through its AFRICOM base in Stuttgart, Germany, said Yar’Adua.
a panapress report today cites another nigerian publication which printed that
Meanwhile, a local newspaper reported on Sunday that the President had denied ever endorsing AFRICOM, adding to the confusion surrounding Nigeria's stand on the issue.
The private Independent newspaper quoted Yar'Adua as saying he only asked US President George Bush to help Africa to establish its own version of AFRICOM, and manage it by itself, without allowing Americans to site their base in Nigeria.
i truly think that the issue of a base in nigeria is a red herring. same goes for an HQ - it does not meet the criteria they've set out for locating a HQ, and nobody is likely to want to relocate their families there anytime soon.
on dec 5th there was a blurb in an air force times article lending more weight to addis ababa as leading contender
...while no decision has been made about where the new combatant command will be headquartered, the [senior Air Force] official said Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, is emerging as a leading contender.
...
The official ... said Addis Ababa is looking increasingly likely as a permanent headquarters for the command, which is currently being run out of Stuttgart, Germany.
Addis Ababa is already home to the African Union, the official said, and is one of the more sophisticated cities on the continent. Ethiopia is also a close U.S. ally in the region.
still, addis ababa does not have a SOFA (yet - or one that has been made known) & there are other drawbacks, largely human rights-oriented issues.
and a report on AFRICOM (under a disguised title) put out last week by csis recommends that
Absent a compelling and overriding strategic rationale for locating AFRICOM’s headquarters in he region, either postpone any decision for basing AFRICOM’s headquarters in africa to a much later point or suspended action altogether. Priority focus should instead be upon demonstrating AFRICOM’s ability to bring concrete gains in its critical emerging partnerships with African governments.
- - - -
finally, not related to this topic, but something we've both covered previously and which you may find informative (if you haven't already read it)
pambazuka: African food sovereignty or AGRA
From November 25th to December 2nd African farmer-, agricultural-, and pastoralist organizations from over 25 countries gathered at the Nyeleni Center in Selengue, Mali to, amongst other things, discuss the pitfalls of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) -- the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation initiative now chaired by former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan. With around 100 organizations present, thousands of Africans concerned with social justice and agriculture were represented.
...
Once the mask of philanthropy is removed, we find profit-hungry corporations vying to control the seed market in African countries, create a path for Genetically Modified seeds and foods and to pry open a market for chemical fertilizers – which in turn will have an adverse effect on African indigenous seed populations and destroy bio-diversity, not to mention the devastation of the environment and the salination of the soil. The philanthropic arm that Africa welcomes is in real terms paving the way for further exploitation of our resources.
...
Africans should grasp what is at stake here and mobilize against AGRA.
also, not sure if you caught it, but a pambazuka column highlighted one of your posts in thier nov 22nd entry. :)
By
Anonymous, at 12:52 AM, December 17, 2007
I suspect you are right that Nigeria is not where they want the HQ. I've been thinking it was unlikely for awhile. And when I read about the US embassy in Addis shaped like a ship, I was sure they were grooming Ethiopia as way high on the list of possibilities. I want a picture, but so far I can't find one. HQ in Addis is certainly bad news for Somalia and Eritrea if true. Bushco may think East Africa is preferable because of their neocon fantasies of military rivalry with China. I think it is pretty funny that the US is borrowing enormous sums from China to finance its efforts to "contain" China. Or like most of this, it would be funny if so many bystanders weren't paying the price. There was a little photo I saw in The Onion today captioned: dead Iraqi would have loved democracy.
It was really distressing to see Pambazuka has recently lost two sources of funding. I hope they can find alternatives. They are remarkably good. Thanks for the tip on the AGRA article. I knew there has been a lot going on with agriculture right now, but in the past couple of weeks I've been too busy to pay much attention, down among the tree roots and to hell with the forest. Most of that is taken care of now. And I did see that Pambazuka highlighted my post. It's funny, usually peoples suggestions for what I should read annoy me. Your suggestions are always right on the money, informative, highly interesting, and I very much appreciate them.
And African Loft published my article, and expressed an interest in further articles. So I think I'll write some more up for them. I like what they are doing. And I'll most certainly be linking to your work.
By
Crossed Crocodiles, at 11:12 PM, December 17, 2007
to follow-up on the confusing stmts coming from both yar'adua & maduekwe, nigerian media on tuesday are running the latest quotes from the latter which shed more light on a couple items. here's what sun news online reported
On the controversial US African Command (AFRICOM) which President Yar’Adua was reported to have acceded to [1] during his meeting with President George Bush of the US last week and which has continued to attract condemnation by sections of the society, he said there was no truth in the report.
“The issue of AFRICOM is very interesting because I don’t understand what the controversy is all about. The president was very clear and unambiguous. One thing people forget is that AFRICOM already exists and is based in Germany [2] and United States wants to take the base to Africa and most African leaders led by Nigeria and South Africa are saying if your interest is security and peace in Africa, American soldiers don’t have to be here.
“The position of Nigeria has not changed. That was the position the president expressed to the National Council of State when they had a meeting in Abuja. So when the president said we don’t mind partnering with AFRICOM, he is expressing the views of AU leaders [3] that look, if you want to support security in Africa and if your interest is to protect Africa, then we don’t mind that, but you can support an African Standby Force which will be put in place where the troops will be Africans.
“That is what the president is saying. I have read all kinds of comments including the one by AC. Many people have not even read the statement of the president before making their criticism which is unfortunate. But the position of Nigeria remains the same, which is that we will not allow AFRICOM in Nigeria,” [4] he pointed out.
1. "was reported to have acceded to" - this is a devious bit of journalism IMO. i mean, it wasn't an ambiguous remark that yar'adua made, was it? there's video & an official transcript from the u.s. govt of the entire briefing.
i have webster's dictionary in front of me and the first definition of "accede" is (a.) to become a party (as to an agreement; (b.) to express approval or give consent : give in to a request or demand.
if you announce that you are partnering w/ AFRICOM, it is clear that both (a) and (b) have been met: partnership requires more than one party, and, by agreeing to partner w/ AFRICOM, you have given consent for it to operate in your area of influence.
2. "One thing people forget is that AFRICOM already exists and is based in Germany" - a key fact that maduekwe conveniently omits is that there already is a u.s. base on the continent, in djibouti (CJTF-HOA), w/ roughly 2000 soldiers stationed there.
again, as the marines there recently heard in a talk given by a former commander, "CJTF-HOA is positioned to serve as a model for AFRICOM"
"Over the years, the mission has matured into a very stable mission," said Helland. "The constant U.S. presence and the engagement in support of coalition forces and partner nations in the Horn of Africa has increased tremendously. The emphasis on building a very strong relationship with the Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa and those partner nations has just grown dramatically. And the focus stays where it should be and that is on the partner nations, and that is the key word, 'partner.'"
and that's not the only base, but it is the one being associated w/ AFRICOM. so is maduekwe (a) a victim of lousy journalism, (b) ignorant of the subject he is speaking on, or (c) engaged in an act of mendacity?
3. "when the president said we don’t mind partnering with AFRICOM, he is expressing the views of AU leaders" - now this is interesting. has there been any public stmts from the AU on their position on AFRICOM? i cannot recall having seen any, but it's possible that i've missed something. if this is indeed their position - that of acceding to partner w/ the united states combatant command - it opens new opportunities for dialog & debate across the continent. that would mean that the AU has ceded the sovereignty of african nations. that's huge (and a hugely unpopular move), one would think.
what's also interesting is that, whereas yar'adua was quoted talking about nigeria and seven regional nations establishing 'their own AFRICOM', the minister is saying that this refers to the long-promised african standby forces (ASF). sounds like a match made in heaven for AFRICOM and pentagon/contractor trainers.
4. "the position of Nigeria remains the same, which is that we will not allow AFRICOM in Nigeria" - here i think maduekwe is intentionally using a very specific idea of what AFRICOM would look like - 'there will be no military headquarters or camp bondsteel, anaconda, or whatever in nigeria.
yet at the same time, how can one partner w/ AFRICOM and then not allow them in? anyway, AFRICOM is initially being created w/ a mixed staff - comprising soldiers, diplomats & USAID personnel. is maduekwe stating that there will be no USAID workers in nigeria?
i cannot imagine that he is so ignorant of what partnering w/ AFRICOM means, esp when he's using carefully chosen words to defend yar'adua since thursday.
---
good writeup on the philippine's lessons angle, BTW. i have some comments re those docs to add at some point, but i've run out of time for tonite.
glad you find the links & referrals valuable, too.
By
Anonymous, at 1:42 AM, December 18, 2007
okay, i'm getting myself confused on this thing as well -- that quote i focused on from the sun news online is not from maduekwe. it came from yar'adua's spokesman, olusegun adeniyi. sorry about that. otherwise, the bulk of my arguments still stand.
and on yar'adua's earlier remarks on nigeria creating their own AFRICOM bases, from nigeria first today
President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua has observed that the Germany-based United States African Command (AFRICOM) can help not only in the establishment of the African Stand-by Force, but also in the proposed Gulf of Guinea Force where troops would be contributed by the countries within the region.
By
Anonymous, at 11:03 AM, December 18, 2007
idependent: Yar’Adua’s Washington Diplomatic Gaffe
...
And in accepting this Greek gift from the US, Yar’Adua was neither naive nor persuaded by national interest. He neither swallowed Washington’s patently false bait that the US will not use force to further its interest on the continent nor enticed by the supposed miracle the $250 million annual AFRICOM budget would wrought on the local economy.
Yar’Adua is well aware of the deleterious consequences of the Command. As has been variously pointed out by military and diplomatic pundits, AFRICOM is an integral part of the ill-informed projection of US power in the 21st century by Bush and his fellow neo-conservatives in Washington. It is all about America and her insatiable quest for oil in the Gulf of Guinea.
Of course, Yar’Adua knows these facts. So, why is he throwing Nigeria’s doors wide open to theUS neo-imperialist gambit, thereby jeopardising our sovereignty? His decision is a cold political calculation informed by self-interest. It is an act of desperation. The quid pro qui from the US for Yar’Adua’s government for endorsing the AFRICOM idea is the pledge to help him surmount the political brickbats being hauled at him from both his own political party, the PDP, and the opposition parties. The US government knows that Yar’Adua’s government lacks legitimacy. Yet, Bush deliberately refused to comment on the election heavily censured by both local and international observers. By so doing, the US president left open a tiny window of blackmail. This is pay back time and the American establishment is pulling the strings.
It is not by mere coincidence that Yar’Adua’s state visit to the US came at a time when it is rumoured that he may have lost favour with the PDP hawks, who have reportedly concluded plans, in the even of the tribunal annulling the presidential polls and calling for fresh election, to field a presidential candidate other than Yar’Adua. This is what happens when a government lacks legitimacy as Yar’Adua’s obviously does. The man at the driver’s seat looks up to external forces to sustain himself in power rather than the people that elected him.
By
Anonymous, at 10:40 PM, December 18, 2007
Looks like the Independent nailed it, and that you were right about trading up godfathers.
As to the AU taking a stand on Africom, I don't think I've seen anything either. South Africa, Nigeria, and some of the regional organizations have verbally opposed AFRICOM. But I haven't seen anything from the AU. There was a report early on that a number of members of the AU, or at least delegates, had endorsed AFRICOM. But no names of countries or individuals were ever published. Which might mean it didn't happen, or it might mean nobody wants to admit it. I can't recall the link or the source right now.
By
Crossed Crocodiles, at 2:06 AM, December 19, 2007
Post a Comment
<< Home