Africa News Digest
LaRouche Addresses Crisis in Sudan
At the Schiller Institute conference in Reston, Virginia, on Sept. 4, Lyndon LaRouche responded to a question emailed by a Zimbabwean on the Sudan crisis. Moderator Edward Spannaus communicated the question.
Spannaus: ...A Zimbabwean living in London, would like Lyn's view on the current U.S. policy on the ongoing crisis in Africa, and Lyn's proposed policy. She says, she watches in dismay as the situation in Darfur in Sudan worsens, the international community dithers, and provides no concrete course of action, but resolution after resolution, while thousands continue to be massacred.
LaRouche: On the question of Darfur, we are in involved in this problemnot directly, but indirectly; I have a longstanding [involvement], and Helga [Zepp-LaRouche] does, with part of this part of Africa.
The problem is, that what is happening in Khartoum, including the Darfur problem, is a problem which is orchestrated, not by indigenous forces inside Sudan, but by a U.S.-British operation, and also an Israeli operation, which has targetted Sudan. It's based on the operation that Lord Kitchener started, in Sudan, in creating strife between disparate peoples of a swamp-like area, between Uganda and Sudan; and the Nubian population of Sudan, which is the largest population.
Remember that Sudan is the largest, geographically, state in Africa. It has oil and other resources. It is also crucial strategically, for the Nile: That Khartoum is at the junction where the Blue Nile, coming out of Ethiopia intersects the White Nile, coming up to that point. From that point on, the main waters of the Nile are going down.
Now, these waters of the Nile are under treaty agreements among various nations, including Ethiopia, Egypt, Sudan, and so forth. And therefore, any disturbance of this water line, could cause, when orchestrated with the aid of Garang, who is a U.S. agent, primarilycould cause the collapse of Egypt: Because, if you shut off the water to Egypt, Egypt will collapse and go into a crisis, and you'll have general crisis in the region.
We understand what the problem is. The crisis there, in the so-called Darfur region, is orchestrated largely from the outside. There are problems in Sudan, as in many other countries, mostly induced by outside interference. The problem is inherently soluble, and should be solved. But, the question is, there is no honorable force ready to deploy, to assist Sudan in dealing with this problem, which must be dealt with, admittedly, as humanitarian.
But, all of Africa, all of Sub-Saharan Africa in particular, is subject to a process of destruction, which dates from the 1970s, on behalf of the British, the United Statesthe utopian sideand certain forces in Israel, which have been playing this game for a long time.
And therefore, we have a difficulty in doing anything practically. Because, to do something about the Darfur situation, you have to be able to deliver force to it, by people who are not going to make the mess worse than it already is. And you also have to get the truth, of the nature of the problem there, which is complex, out. The whole thing, now, as represented in the press is a fraud. There is a very serious problem therequite different than is represented.
We should do something about it. We are active. We are poised to do something about it, in the first moment that we, or people associated with us, might have the opportunity to act.
Pakistan Questions U.S.-Proposed Sanctions vs. Sudan
Pakistan's UN Ambassador, Munir Akram, questioned whether sanctions against Sudan's oil industry would be credible, according to Voice of America Sept. 15. "And if the threat is held out by the Security Council, and Sudan says we will not cooperate any more under threat, you will have a lot of people dying in Sudan [because of the sanctions, as in Iraq], and what will the international community do after that? Will it send in a force of 50,000 people? Is it capable of doing it? It's not. So let's not hold out empty threats or threats that could cause lots of people to die."
Sudan Disputes WHO Report on Rising Darfur Death Rates
WHO reports that between 6,000 and 10,000 people are currently dying each month from disease and violence in Darfur, and the rate has increased over the past three months. Diarrhea, it says, is the single biggest killer, causing nearly a quarter of all deaths. According to the survey, "The population, especially in the West and possibly in the North, is dying at between five and ten times the rate that is normal for people in Sudan." The WHO survey was done by WHO and Sudanese epidemiologists of more than 3,100 households between June 15 and Aug. 15.
David Nabarro of WHO told Reuters Sept. 14, that between a third and a half of those surveyed in the refugee camps said they had no latrines, and about a quarter said they had no access to safe drinking water.
The rate is much lower than the worst-case scenario published by the U.S. Agency for International Development, which foresaw 300,000 deaths over nine months, and 36,000 in August alone.
Sudanese Humanitarian Affairs Minister Ibrahim Hamid, speaking to reporters Sept. 14, disagreed with the WHO figures. "I don't think this assessment is correct," he said, adding, "The death rate is decreasing."
Sudan Rebuts Powell's Claim of Genocide in Darfur
In a statement issued Sept. 13, Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs rebutted Colin Powell's claim that the government of Sudan was guilty of genocide in Darfur. The strongest points in the statement are these:
1. The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948), which defines what genocide is, was an international document. Therefore, the U.S. has no authority to unilaterally determine a case of genocide.
2. The African heads of state and government unanimously agreed at their recent summit that concepts of genocide and ethnic cleansing are not applicable in Darfur. Also, teams of the United Nations, Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, European Union, Organization of Islamic Conference, and of various NGOs [including the International Committee of the Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders] have not found genocide in Darfur. Neither did the report of Kofi Annan's Special Representative to Sudan, Jan Pronk.
3. It is amazing to hear such a claim from Colin Powell, in light of the genocide of Hiroshima and Nagasaki [118,000 dead, many injured; very many dead in the earlier firebombing of Japanese cities; in Germany, between 250,000 and a half-million dead in Dresden firebombing alone], as well as the current mass killing of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.
4. Sudan has opened its doors and received international observers, thousands of representatives of NGOs, UN agencies, international media, and human rights activists [many of whom have had freedom to roamsee, for example, the New Yorker, Sept. 13]. But can the U.S. open the doors of Abu Ghraib prison for inspectors and human rights activists?
5. Powell's claim has the same merit as the earlier claim of WMD in Iraq.
African Union Not Convinced by Powell's Genocide Claim
Sam Ibok, director of the African Union's (AU) Peace and Security Council, told the UN's IRIN news service, "We cannot call it genocide at this point in time because we have not fully investigated it. For now, we are preoccupied with saving lives."
Apparently unimpressed by the results of a survey the State Department farmed out to an advocacy organization, Ibok said Powell's assertion of genocide "should be backed up. If it is not, the Sudanese government will not take anybody seriously." Ibok continued, "After designating it a genocide, what next? What is the U.S. going to do?... People keep talking about increasing the size of the AU presence, but the money is just not there, people just keep talking about it." Sudan has said it welcomes an increase in the size of the observer force.
It remains to be seen whether the AU can accept financing and logistical support from the Cheney-Bush Administration and maintain its freedom of action.
Genocide Claim Against Sudan Has Intended Effect
The two Darfur insurrectionary movements walked out of peace talks with Khartoum sponsored by the African Union in Abuja, Nigeria, Sept. 15. "The attitude of Colin Powell and America generally was the main cause of the stalemate," Sudanese envoy Majzoub al-Khalifa Ahmad told AP Sept. 15. "It sent a wrong message to the rebels, and that resulted in their hardening their position," he said.
Writing in the Independent (UK) Sept. 16, Meera Selva noted, "The rebels are keen for the international community to intervene directly in Darfur, and believe that sanctions are more likely to be imposed if peace talks fail repeatedly. They have refused to disarm unless the Janjaweed are disarmed first."
So what has happened? The International Crisis Group trashed the African Union talks the day they began Aug. 23, by preempting them with its own tilt on what should happen in Sudan. The Washington Post did the same with its Aug. 23 op-ed calling for the overthrow of Sudan's government, one of the parties. Then on Sept. 9, Colin Powell told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the Sudanese government was guilty of genocide. The Abuja talks deadlocked the next day, and broke up Sept. 15.
Arrests in South Africa Linked to Nuclear Proliferation
Arrests in South Africa, for illegally supplying uranium enrichment equipment, were in the context of an international investigation of the Adbul Qadeer Khan network, according to a statement Sept. 7 by South Africa's Council for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Khan was the leading figure in Pakistan's nuclear weapons program, who was accused of supplying components to produce nuclear weapons to Libya, Iran, and North Korea. The investigation includes the IAEA, German authorities, and those of 19 other countries.
Engineer Johan Meyer, director of Tradefin Engineering of Vanderbijlpark, South Africa, was arrested Sept. 2 for contravening the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Energy acts. Two others, Gerhard Wisser and Daniel Geiges, described as Randburg businessmen and directors of Krisch Engineering of Strydompark, were arrested Sept. 8 on the same charges. Wisser, a German, after being arrested in Germany in August for alleged complicity in treason, in connection with the same activities, had been released there on bail.
"Essential components in the process to enrich uranium" have been confiscated, including centrifuges, according to Abdul Minty, the Non-Proliferation Council's chairman. Enriched uranium is also used in peaceful technologies, but it is an offense in South Africa to send enrichment technology abroad without a permit.
Charges against Meyer were withdrawn Sept. 8, and he has disappeared, apparently into a witness protection program. "Meyer is believed to be providing law enforcement agents with details of at least 15 businessmen and businesses allegedly involved in the sale and manufacturing of nuclear equipment for rogue nations such as Libya, Iran, and North Korea," according to the Saturday Argus Sept. 11.
The IAEA board was briefed on the arrests at its Vienna meeting Sept. 13.
Likud Party Delegation in South Africa
A Likud Party delegation was in South Africa for talks with President Mbeki Sept. 7 on Middle East Peace. An eight-member delegation, led by Israeli Deputy Trade and Industry Minister David Ratzon, held the first-ever talks between the South African government and the Likud Party, AFP reported Sept. 7. Talks continued over Sept. 7 and 8.
South Africa under President Mbeki has defended the sovereign rights of Palestine. This year it supported the Palestinian case challenging the legality of Israel's apartheid wall before the International Court of Justice.
|