What is behind US new anti-terrorist operation in Uganda?
8 min read
|
Photo: EPA
|
|
The US has sent 100 of its soldiers to Uganda and some neighboring countries, including South Sudan.
The official explanation is that they were sent to fight against the Ugandan sect. or rather terrorist group, which calls itself “Lord’s Resistance Army”.
The sect was formed in 1987 by a certain Joseph Kony, formerly a Roman Catholic priest, who proclaims himself a prophet. For all these years, Kony has been trying to seize power in Uganda – as he says, in order to create “a state based on the Bible”. The self-appointed “prophet” claims that only young souls, untouched with sins, are capable of building such a state. That’s why, when the cult’s followers seize a town or a village, they kill the adults and take the children with them.
According to human rights organizations’ data, in total, the “Lord’s Army” has killed several tens of thousands of adults, and kidnapped up to 40,000 children. Saving themselves from the terrorists, about 2 mln people have fled Uganda. In 2005, the International Criminal Court issued an order to arrest Joseph Kony.
So, at first sight, it may seem quite clear why the US is sending troops to Uganda – to fight with a terrorist group which calls itself a religious cult. Moreover, the US is also sending inspectors to teach Ugandan servicemen to fight terrorists more effectively.
However, a closer glance would show that it is not all that simple. The Ugandan province, where the sect acts, borders with South Sudan – a region which is very rich in oil. And, there is information that the US wants to take control over all these oil riches and lead a pipeline from South Sudan to the Atlantic Ocean – but, this madman of a prophet and his terrorists are the main obstacle to that.
Political analyst Nikolay Tikhomirov comments:
“Americans are very interested in oil. This is the main reason why they got involved in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The story with this Ugandan operation is very similar.”
Andrey Sidorov from the Moscow State University shares the same opinion:
“The US has oil interests practically everywhere where oil can be found. For example, in Iraq oil is cheap, but of a very high quality – and that was the main reason why George W. Bush sent forces there.”
“However,” Andrey Sidorov continues, “Barack Obama might have had some other considerations as well, when he started this Ugandan operation.”
“If the US withdraws its forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, this will give international terrorism more freedom to raise its ugly head. And, Mr. Obama, of course, wants to present himself as a fighter with terrorism – the more so, because presidential elections are at hand. Mr. Obama is showing to his potential voters – at least, the conservatively-minded ones – that he is a strong-willed and decisive man. Besides soldiers, he is sending inspectors who will train Ugandan servicemen to fight against terrorists. This is done to make it look more like an anti-terrorist operation, but Mr. Obama may have some other interests behind this Ugandan campaign as well.”
Whatever the reasons why the US started this operation may be, a question arises: will 100 soldiers – a small bunch, in fact – cope with a terrorist network that has been terrorizing Uganda for about 20 years? If we think 20 years back, we may remember the fiasco of another US operation in Africa – namely, in Somalia.
http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/10/18/58920520.html
Why Is Obama Deploying U.S. Troops Against rag-tag Bandits, Unless….
By Peter Ngom
The Obama administration has announced that it has dispatched about 100 armed U.S. troops to Central Africa –Uganda, South Sudan, Central African Republic (CAR) and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)– purportedly to apprehend the leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA).
 |
| U.S. and Ugandan troops; is Joseph Kony’s LRA the true objective? |
The LRA is an anti-President Yoweri Museveni insurgency which started in Uganda and had since moved to the large swath of land between DRC, CAR and South Sudan after the failure of the Juba Peace talks between the LRA and Museveni’s government, in December 2008.
The Museveni regime has in the past attempted –or claims it did– to defeat the LRA, including through scorched earth tactics to decimate them. Yet Museveni has also used the LRA for political and financial propaganda purposes when it suits him. The U.S. has also been supporting the Museveni regime all along: militarily, financially, logistically, politically, technically and diplomatically culminating in the botched attack on LRA camps, operation “Lightening Thunder” that fell like a dud on December 14th, 2008.
Since then, the Uganda government has claimed that it has terribly degraded the LRA to the point that it is no longer a serious threat. The rag-tag LRA is variously estimated to number 200 to 500 fighters. Contrast this with the combined national troops of Uganda, CAR, DRC and South Sudan, which number almost a quarter of a million troops:
Central African Republic, 2,150; Democratic Republic of the Congo, 151,651; South Sudan, 45,395 and; Uganda, 45,000. Additionally, there are militias in the four countries numbering in thousands.
Furthermore, the United Nations has deployed about 50,500 peace keeping troops in this region: Sudan/Darfur, UNAMID, 26,000; South Sudan, UNMISS, 7,000 and; Democratic Republic of the Congo, MONUSCO, 17,500.
Given the staggering numbers of these troops compared to the rag-tag LRA rebel fighters, one would expect the LRA to have been eliminated by now. Could there be that there other motives at play, with the U.S. deployment? How has the LRA managed to survive when faced against the overwhelming “opposition” from tens of thousands or troops; 45,000 from Uganda alone? Could it be that Museveni has always had an incentive for the prolongation of the LRA’s existence since it secures military and financial benefits from the West to “combat” the LRA?
Neither the rationale nor the timing of the announcement of the deployment of 100 U.S. troops in Central Africa makes sense.
Why is the U.S. deploying now?
Looking at the balance of power, it is obvious that the four countries together with the UN have an overwhelming superiority over the rag-tag LRA rebels. The LRA has been reported to have continued to commit heinous crimes and must face justice. What about the crimes under Museveni? Clinging to power: by deceit, corruption and suppression of dissent frequently; by arrests, jailings, torture and killing opponents with impunity. Why single out only the LRA while bestowing blessings on Museveni? Shouldn’t both be brought to justice?
The announcement has also come at a time when the American people are suffering from war fatigue having been at war in Iraq and Afghanistan for the last 10 and 8 years respectively. It also comes at a time that the U.S. economy is in the dumps and the budget deficit is at an all time high. It seems inexplicable that the U.S. would want to start yet another war as Americans are looking forward to an end of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
To understand the real reasons, we need to think outside the usual LRA narrative by looking at what has happened recently in the world or in the region that could have prompted President Obama to deploy troops in Central Africa:
First, the overriding national U.S. concern is terrorism directed at America and its allies. The hot spots in Africa include Somalia and Northern Nigeria. Recent events in Libya have magnified the urgency to control the unintended consequences of the Libyan war; dangerous weapons such as heat guided shoulder fired missiles and crude uranium materials falling into the hands of terrorists.
In a small way, the concern about the LRA is that it could act as a conduit to export the weapons to be used elsewhere like in Somalia. Alternatively, the LRA narrative is simply a ruse to cover up the real reason for the deployment of U.S. troops in the region.
Second, the announcement could help relieve internal pressure on President Museveni being mounted by citizens who are tired of being abused by the Museveni regime. On the one hand, it is a familiar pattern that whenever President Museveni is under pressure, he uses controversial issues like the LRA threat to security or his threat to give away the venerable Mabira Forest for growing sugar cane. On the other hand, the announcement could be an appreciation for President Museveni’s waging of a proxy war on terror in Somalia on behalf of the U.S.
Third, the long-term goal of the U.S. in this region is to secure the vast natural resources including oil in South Sudan and Uganda, and critical minerals including uranium and coltan from the DRC. In this respect, the LRA does not pose a significant threat to the American effort to secure these resources.
Fourth, this is an election season in the U.S. Due to the bad economic situation, President Obama is not doing as well among the electorate as he did in 2008. Some analysts have speculated that this is merely a symbolic act to placate the youth who have been actively calling for the elimination of the LRA. By so doing, the President hopes to mobilize the youth for his re-election campaign. If true, it reflects the pettiness by which the presidential power can be used and it is not acceptable.
Lastly, in spite of their alliance, the relationship between the Obama administration and the Museveni regime is riddled with embarrassment, unfriendly and insulting comments, suspicion and mistrust.
For example, according to WikiLeaks, former U.S. ambassador to Uganda, Jerry Lanier gave President Museveni a failing grade in governance. Most recently, a member of Parliament revealed that the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency gave him documents alleging kickbacks paid to senior ministers for facilitating oil contracts in Uganda.
On his part, President Museveni denounced the people who originated the allegation of bribery as “idiots.” There are rumors of an impending army takeover should the allegedly corrupt ministers not step down and allow investigations. Could it be that the announced deployment is in anticipation of a regime change in Uganda, as a way to pre-empt the country from catching the Arab Spring virus?
While these are reasonable speculations, the official rationale by Washington for the deployment of the 100 troops in Central Africa does not make sense is not credible.
“Speaking Truth To Empower.”
http://blackstarnews.com/news/122/ARTICLE/7722/2011-10-18.html
About Post Author
