Wednesday, January 23, 2013

2013-01-23 "Nine arrested at Lockheed Martin resisting the evil triplets of American society: racism, extreme materialism, and militarism"

from "Brandywine Peace Community" [P.O. Box 81, Swarthmore, PA 19081] [610-544-1818] [www.brandywinepeace.com], posted at [http://www.nukeresister.org/2013/01/23/nine-arrested-resisting-the-evil-triplets-of-american-society-racism-extreme-materialism-and-militarism/]:
photo by Georgina Shanley

Short video of the day’s nonviolent resistance/disobedience here [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6SIGriRjws]: Martin Luther King Day, 2013, arrest of 9 people from the Brandywine Peace Community, Pa for trespassing on Lockheed Martin's HQ in King of Prussia, Pa. The largest arms dealer in the world, including drone trading, makes its profit from killing.Commemorating MLK Day with this non-violent action results in arrests while the shareholders of this arms king reap in the profits.
As part of the Brandywine Peace Community’s noontime Martin Luther King Day of Nonviolent Resistance at Lockheed Martin, more than fifty people stood with banners and signs in front of the King of Prussia, PA complex of the world’s largest war profiteer, Lockheed Martin. Many of those gathered (just as in previous years) were from the New Jerusalem Laura, a faith-based addiction recovery community in North Philadelphia.
As people arrived for the day’s demonstration honoring the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and his message of nonviolent action for justice and peace, excerpts of many of Dr. King’s sermons and speeches were being broadcast loudly in front of Lockheed Martin, located directly behind the King of Prussia Mall, the area’s largest shopping mall (indeed, the largest mall on the East Coast).
The demonstration began with a series of chants (Honor King’s Legacy; For peace, Stop Lockheed Martin!; Inaugurate Justice, Make War No More; Many Suffer, Few Profit) and focus readings as Barack Obama was concluding his inaugural speech in Washington, DC. and just as drone strikes were again raining down on Yemen.
The customary intoning of our peace bell, and the lyrics of Tom Mullian singing “The Needed Times”, followed.  These are the needed times, these are the needed…Sister, won’t you walk with me, Sister, won’t you walk with me…segued way beautifully into the Litany of the King Day memorial, based on Dr. King’s Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance speech in 1964 that concluded: “…I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality, and freedom for their spirits. I believe that what self-centered people have torn down other-centered can build up and that one day humanity will bow before the altars of God and be crowned triumphant over war and bloodshed, and nonviolent redemptive good will be proclaimed the rule of the land…and I still believe that We Shall Overcome”
As the voice of Dr. King boomed again in front of Lockheed Martin, this time with the words from his Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence speech at Riverside Church, April 4, 1967, echoing his call to resist “the evil triplets of American society: racism, extreme materialism, and militarism”, nine people carrying signs befitting the day and prepared to be arrested walked up the driveway entrance toward the company’s main lobby entrance.  Lockheed Martin security and Upper Merion police, seeming surprised by the direction of the war resisters, bolted from the heat of their cars to stop the activists from preceding any further.
Each of the nine were arrested, taken to the Upper Merion police station and cited for Disorderly Conduct and released.  They are: Mary Jo McArthur, Bernadette Cronin-Geller, Beth Friedlan, Fr. Patrick Sieber, OFM, and Robert M. Smith, all from Philadelphia, PA; Theresa Camerota and Tom Mullian, from Wyncote, PA; Paul Sheldon, Drexel Hill, PA; and Rev. Dave Reppert, Conshohocken, PA.
“…Today, here at Lockheed Martin, we honor the legacy and dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and continue the struggle for economic and social justice, and peace.  Inaugurate Justice. Stop Lockheed Martin. Make War No More..”  (from the Martin Luther King Day of Nonviolent Resistance at Lockheed, January 21, 2013).

Monday, January 21, 2013

2013-01-21 "Die-in at Bangor nuclear sub base honors Martin Luther King, Jr."

from "Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action" [www.gzcenter.org] [subversivepeacemaking@gmail.com], posted at [http://www.nukeresister.org/2013/01/21/die-in-at-bangor-nuclear-sub-base-honors-martin-luther-king-jr/]:
photo by Leonard Eiger

8 ACTIVISTS ARRESTED -
Activists from a local peace group blocked the main gate and staged a die-in at the Navy’s West Coast Trident nuclear submarine base for more than a half hour in an act of civil resistance to nuclear weapons.
Nearly fifty people participated in Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action’s annual celebration of the life and legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. on Saturday, January 19, 2013.
Under the theme “We Are One,” the day focused on Dr. King’s commitment to nonviolence and his opposition to war and nuclear weapons.
The day’s activities included a viewing of a video about King’s 1967 sermon in opposition to the Vietnam war. That followed with a discussion of the sermon’s relevance in the context of today’s unending wars on Iraq and Afghanistan and the effects on the poor and disenfranchised in the US, as well as the entire world. Participants also participated in nonviolence training, education about the Trident nuclear weapons system and the Bangor submarine base, and preparations for the vigil and nonviolent direct action planned for the afternoon at Bangor.
The Trident submarine base at Bangor, just 20 miles from Seattle, contains the largest concentration of operational nuclear weapons in the US arsenal (and possibly the entire world).  Each of the 8 Trident submarines at Bangor carries up to 24 Trident II (D-5) missiles, each capable of being armed with as many as 8 independently targetable thermonuclear warheads.  Each nuclear warhead has an explosive force of between 100 and 475 kilotons (up to 30 times the force of the Hiroshima bomb).
In the afternoon while the group maintained a peaceful vigil on the roadside outside the base entrance eleven protesters entered the roadway directly in front of the entrance gate.  They carried a banner, which they stretched across the inbound traffic lanes.  It quoted from Martin Luther King Jr.: “When scientific power outruns spiritual power, we end up with guided missiles and misguided men.”  An additional banner that was brought out a few minutes later read, “Abolish Nuclear Weapons.”
Peacekeepers from Ground Zero ensured the safety of all participants throughout the vigil and nonviolent direct action, and communicated with base security personnel as needed.
Traffic into the main gate was re-routed for approximately a half hour until a Washington State Patrol officer arrived and ordered the protesters to leave the roadway.  The protesters then dropped the banners and staged a die-in on the roadway.  As one participant explained, “By doing a die-in, we can illustrate the horrific result of a nuclear weapon.”
Eight of the die-in participants crossed onto the base before dropping to the ground.  Naval security personnel, who had been observing during the vigil and action, immediately moved in to arrest them.  They were taken to a building on the base where they were questioned, processed and released after being issued citations for trespassing.  All will receive summons to appear in Federal court.
Those cited for trespassing were Mary Gleystein, Kingston, WA; Lynne Greenwald, Tacoma, WA; Rodney Herold, Seattle, WA; Thomas Hodges, Seattle, WA; Constance Mears of Poulsbo, WA; Taylor Niemy, Bremerton, WA; Michael Siptroth, Belfair, WA; and Carlo Voli, Edmonds, WA.
The other three protesters – Gabriel LaValle, Lynnwood, WA; Tom Shea, Snoqualmie, WA; and Alice Zillah, Olympia, WA – remained outside of the base boundary.  All three left the roadway and were not cited.
While the blockade and die-in were in progress, others vigiled along the roadside.  One participant was overheard referring to one of King’s where he said that “Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind” in a direct reference to the need to work together to abolish nuclear weapons from the Earth.
Ground Zero holds three scheduled vigils and actions each year in resistance to Trident and in protest of U.S. nuclear weapons policy.  The group is currently engaged in legal actions in Federal court to halt the Navy’s construction of a Second Explosives Handling Wharf at Bangor.  Ground Zero is also working to de-fund the Navy’s plans for a next generation ballistic missile submarine, estimated to cost $99 billion to build.
For over thirty-three years Ground Zero has engaged in education, training in nonviolence, community building, resistance against Trident and action toward a world without nuclear weapons.

Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Occupy Beale AFB! "Report Back: Jan. 8 Beale 9 Anti-Drone Hearing and Rally"

[www.occupybealeafb.org], news archive for the Peace vigil and Occupy action at Beale AFB! [solanopeacejustice.blogspot.com/2013/12/occupy-beale-afb.html].
Contact information:
* Bay Area: Toby, 510-215-5974; ratherbenyckeling@comcast.net
* Nevada County: Shirley, 941-320-0291; slogood481@hotmail.com

2013-01-16 message from The "Beale 9": Shirley, Sharon, Janie, David, Jan, Louie, MacGregor, Barry and Toby:* 5 charged with Trespassing, 4 arrestees had charges dismissed.
* Next Occupy Beale Anti-drone Encampment: Jan. 30-31, Wed. 3pm to Thurs. 9am, Meet at Main Gate, N. Beale Rd.
* Guari Delgado's photos [https://plus.google.com/photos/105993180715995879917/albums/5831521940177924161]:





Background:  On Oct. 31st,  60 peace activists gathered at Beale AFB to stand in unity against U.S. drone warfare.  The main gate was blocked for nearly 5 hours.  Utimately 9 activists were arrested.  There arraignment was Jan. 8th. in Sacramento.  Here's the report back on a most amazing day!

Phase 1:  Pre-hearing Rally and Arraignment -
   35-40 activists from Sacramento, Grass Valley, Chico, SF Bay Area and Salinas participated in a lively pre-hearing rally.  Large anti-drone banners and signs colored the sidewalks around the Federal courtroom for hours, before, during and after the rally.  (Guari's photos tell all)  Thanks to all who supported it! 
We had some media coverage, including the SacBee here: [http://www.sacbee.com/2013/01/09/5101415/beale-drone-protesters-arraigned.html] (More media coverage below).
The Arraignment:  Cres put together an awesome legal team of at least 9 lawyers to represent us all pro bono, the "Dream Team," as he calls it.  Attorneys Michael Hansen and Mark Reichel were there on our behalf at the arraignment. 
5 arrestees pled "not guilty" to trespassing charges.  The prosecution requested that 4 of the 9 arrestees have their charges dismissed due to "weak evidence," according to the SacBee news report.  No explanation was given in the courtroom. 
Trial date set for the April 15 for the "BEALE 5".  Their attorneys are likely to request a jury trial.
Details in Sharon's Blog: [http://sharondelgado.org/2013/01/08/todays-arraignment/]
And Robin Ryan's blog: [http://hapiomusette.blogspot.com/2013/01/imagine.html?zx=33eb9aa09238a8ed]

Phase 2:  Concerned Citizens appeal to Congress -
A serious effort was made to demand congressional oversight over the illegal and immoral extra-judiciary killings under the U.S. drone warfare program executed by Obama's lawless Administration.  Several dozen activists delivered signed letters to staff from the offices of Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Doris Matsui.  We also delivered copies of revealing research studies on the negative effects of the U.S. drone program and civilian casualties. 
* [http://livingunderdrones.org/report/]
* [http://web.law.columbia.edu/human-rights-institute/counterterrorism/drone-strikes/counting-drone-strike-deaths]
BOXER:  Two attempts in the morning to have a meeting with Sen. Boxer's staff were fruitless, even though contact was made days earlier to let them know there were constituents gathering that day from the greater N. Calif. area. However, a revealing photo was on the office wall revealing the Senator's priorities re: peace and war (see disturbing photo at end of this message).
MATSUI:  In contrast, though the visit was unscheduled, Ellie Longo, a staff member from Rep. Doris Matsui's office, did allow a large group of activists to meet with her informally and voice their complaints about U.S. drone killings in an extensive exchange.  She ultimately showed respect and concern for why we were there and promised to try to arrange a meeting with us with the Congresswoman and to give her our signed letters.

The letter: (please share the letter with others and deliver to your nearest Congressperson soon!)
Dear Senator/Representative:        
Last month, 20 of our precious and innocent children were killed in a barrage of bullets from weapons carried by someone unknown to them. Our country still reels from the numbing news. We mourn for them, for their families, and for our country.
In Yemen and in Pakistan, countries with which we are not at war, at least 178 precious and innocent children have been killed by U.S. drone strikes launched by someone unknown to them. As a people, why do we not respond with equal revulsion and sympathy?
Are the children of foreign lands any less precious? And is the government that is responsible for their deaths any less guilty of murder than the Newtown gunman?
You hold in your hands, by the power of your office, the capacity to stop the carnage. In the name of decency, and in memory of the innocent children the world over killed by our drones, I ask you to co-sponsor HR 819, directing the U.S. Attorney General to transmit to the House any and all legal documents and memoranda relating to the use of drones by the U.S. government.
I will look to you, as my elected representative, to sign on to HR 819 before the end of this month. Your failure to do so will announce to the world your complicity in the murder by assault weapons of children no less precious than our own.
Most sincerely, [your name]

Phase 3:  Afternoon Anti-Drone Protests at Military Bases -
Beale AFB:   11-12 people from Bay Area, Sacramento, Linda, Nevada County and Chico "caravaned" to the Main Gate for a lively and impassioned afternoon protest with banners for a couple of hours. Jeffrey led them all in uplifting peace songs.  Barry Binks from Sacramento VFP was courageous enough to go solo to the Wheatland/S. Beale Rd. gate where he reported there was lots of traffic.
Travis AFB:  2 activists stood vigil and held out 2 very large banners and flashed peace signs.  At both bases, large photos of a Pakistani child victim's face was displayed to show Americans the true face of drone warfare.  These often evoked angry responses, as they aroused uncomfortable feelings. But our purpose is to uncover the truth about our "sanitized" drone wars, no matter how difficult it is to face the reality.  A truth our mass media fails so terribly to reveal.
A bazillion thanks to all who came to support the amazing day.  Hope to see more of you participating as this movement grows!

Full Media Coverage:
* [http://www.sacbee.com/2013/01/09/5101415/beale-drone-protesters-arraigned.html]
* [http://www.appeal-democrat.com/news/rm0110bealedrop-122454--.html]
* KCRA 3, local TV did a story [http://www.theunion.com/news/4279615-113/drone-drones-delgado-beale?show=comments].
* This is a blog of U.S. Court cases that goes to lawyers, judges, etc. [http://edca.typepad.com/eastern_district_of_calif/2013/01/beale-afb-protesters-arraigned.html].
* [http://wagingnonviolence.org/2013/01/how-can-you-resist-the-age-of-drones/]

Does Sen. Boxer stand with Peace or War?????
Photo on the wall in Senator Boxer's office.....in the background is the Global Hawk, the surveillance drone flown at Beale, and an accomplice in the targeted killings.  

Of note,  a google search revealed Brig. General Polumbo now works at Langley AFB, right next to CIA headquarters........ummmmmmmmm!!!!!!    

Friday, January 11, 2013

Stop the War against the People of Africa!



2013-01-11 "UNAC STATEMENT ON THE RAPIDLY INCREASING U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTION IN AFRICA"
US sending 3500 troops to Africa -
On Christmas Day, 2012 – a time when few people were paying attention to the news – the Associated Press reported that the Obama administration had decided to send some 3,500 U.S. troops early in 2013 into as many as 35 of Africa's 54 countries, claiming it is part of an intensifying Pentagon effort to train countries to battle “extremists” and to “give the United States a ready and trained force to dispatch to Africa if crises requiring the U.S. military emerge.”

History of U.S. forces in Africa -
It was a significant escalation of what has been a steadily increasing introduction of U.S. forces into the formerly colonized continent. Over the past few decades, the U.S. has devoted more and more attention to Africa, both because of its vast natural resources, consumer and government markets and historically cheap labor, and because of the U.S.' increasingly fierce competition with China both for these resources and for political influence with African countries.
On Dec. 30 the AP reported the president had sent 50 U.S. troops to Chad, “to help evacuate U.S. citizens and embassy personnel from the neighboring Central African Republic’s capital of Bangui in the face of rebel advances toward the city.”
In the fall of 2011, the U.S. sent about 100 U.S. troops “to help hunt down the leaders of the notoriously violent Lord's Resistance Army in and around Uganda.” (CNN, Oct. 11, 2011)
That same CNN article reported the Pentagon also was “sending equipment to Central African armed forces and training a Democratic Republic of Congo light infantry battalion deployed in that country's northeast” and that the Pentagon's U.S. Africa Command, or AFRICOM, was “exploring ways to support the military of South Sudan.”
By early October 2010, the report stated, “the U.S. military had more than 1,700 troops deployed in sub-Saharan Africa,” mostly stationed in the small East African country of Djibouti, but with “at least a small presence in 33 different nations in sub-Saharan Africa.”
Although AFRICOM now operates throughout Africa, its operational command center is still in Stuttgardt, Germany. That's because no African country has yet agreed to host it. The Command now may have found its de facto headquarters in Ougadougou, Burkina Faso, from which it has been sending drone surveillance flights over northern Mali.
In June 2005, AFRICOM launched its five-year Trans-Saharan Counter Terrorism Partnership. That was followed in 2006 with Flintlock, a now annual “regional exercise among African, Western, and U.S. counterterrorism forces.”
In February 2012, there was Atlas Accord 12, an “annual-joint-aerial-delivery exercise, hosted by U.S. Army Africa,” which “brings together U.S. Army personnel with militaries in Africa to enhance air drop capabilities and ensure effective delivery of military resupply materials and humanitarian aid.” (Website of U.S. Army Africa, AFRICOM, Feb. 10, 2012.) This took place while the Tuareg rebellion was unfolding in the north.
The arguments supporting the deployments are always the same: the presence of “Islamists” or other extremists in countries suffering from a lack of financial resources, unstable governments and internal strife – all of which, where they exist, can be traced to the legacy of Western colonialism and neocolonialism.

U.S. intervention in Mali -
One country has emerged as a particular focus of interest for the U.S. military: the West African Republic of Mali.
Early in 2012, long-simmering grievances of various ethnic groups in Northern Mali erupted in a resumption of an off-and-on-again armed struggle for independence that dates back to the French colonial period. On March 21 a group of mid-level officers and rank-and-file soldiers, angered by the government's inability to effectively combat the rebellion, staged a coup, ousting the democratically elected president, Amadou Toumani Toure. Prior to the coup, AFRICOM had established training programs and joint operations with the Malian army.
Meanwhile, hundreds of Tuaregs who had sought work in Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi's Libya, some as soldiers in the Libyan army, were returning home to escape the anti-Black pogroms being carried out by the Western-backed “rebel” forces. Many came back with their weapons and joined the rebellion. On April 6 the National Movement for the Liberation of the Azawad, or MNLA, a military-political force representing the impoverished Tuareg people in Northern Mali, declared the northern half of the country to be a new, independent nation.
Also coming into the country were what the U.S. described as large numbers of Arab fighters who identified with forces such as Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa (MUJAO), whose goal was to take control of all of Mali and impose a severe interpretation of Sharia law.
It was the presence of these outside forces that gave the U.S. and France an excuse to try and orchestrate a regional military intervention in Mali, supposedly to prevent the North from becoming a haven for terrorists. In addition, U.S. and France are both planning to send spy drones over the territory to assist in identifying targets for overt bombing missions.
However, those reports of large numbers of Islamists entering the area have been denied by the rival MNLA.
“The arrival of convoys of jihadists from Sudan and the Western Sahara are totally false,” said MNLA spokesperson Ibrahim Ag Mohamed Assaleh. “We categorically deny it.” (AFP, Oct. 22, 2012)
Even a Malian security source told the French Press Agency that there is “the arrival of new terrorists in the north of Mali,” but that claims of several hundred are “exaggerated.” (Sapa-AFP, Oct. 22, 2012)

Ignoring these objections, the U.S. and France are now making political, diplomatic and military plans to force through a U.N.-backed plan to essentially invade Mali and take control of its weak political and military infrastructure. The mechanism for the invasion would be the Economic Community of West African States, or ECOWAS, a 15-nation regional political and military alliance in which the U.S. has strong influence.

Why Mali?
Two reasons: oil, and the country's critical geo-political importance.
It has long been suspected that the northeastern region of Mali that borders Algeria potentially holds vast oil and gas reserves. The recent confirmation of oil reserves near Tessalit, a small Malian oasis town about 40 miles from the Algerian border, has fed Western hunger for control of that area.
The second reason for the intensifying U.S. interest is that Mali borders no less than seven West and North African countries, including Algeria, Niger, Senegal and Mauritania. Controlling Mali would give the U.S. an important hub from which to influence regional developments. This has been Washington's strategy for the Continent as a whole: to use economic aid and military training to develop close relationships with key governments and their militaries – such as Kenya, Ethiopia and Uganda – so the U.S. can use them as a network of regional proxies to control all of Africa. This was the strategy that England and France used to control the Middle East after World War I, as well as the one England used with such success in India during that country's colonial period.
Meanwhile, there is not one significant force in or out of the Malian government that has called for outside intervention, whether led by the Western powers or ECOWAS.
Without a doubt, Africa has many problems – poverty, insufficient infrastructure, AIDS, high infant mortality rates and short life expectancies. Such is the legacy of the forced removal of tens of millions of its most productive people, as well as the many years of brutal and exploitative colonization.

Responsibility of antiwar movement -
But Africa still is a continent of vast natural resources: gold, diamonds, uranium, oil, natural gas, fishing and agriculture. There is no reason why Africans cannot develop these resources to not only meet their own needs but to be in a position to help other impoverished peoples. But first they must have something they lost hundreds of years ago: control over their continent's riches.
The U.S. anti-war movement, which has fought so hard to oppose U.S. intervention in the Middle East and other regions of the world, must take up the long-overdue struggle to oppose U.S. intervention in Africa. We must demand the dismantling of AFRICOM. We must oppose any U.S. or European-led intervention in Mali. We must call for the withdrawal of all Western troops from the Continent. We must demand Western reparations for the unimaginable damage wrought on Africa and Africans by centuries of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, colonialism and neocolonialism.
To do any less would be to abandon our international responsibilities and our commitment to help win a just and peaceful world for all.

U.S. Out of Africa!    Shut Down AFRICOM!
No Intervention in Mali!
Reparations for Centuries of Exploitation!
Money for Jobs and Education, Not for War and Occupation!


2013-02-01 "The Real Invasion of Africa and Other Not-Made-for-Hollywood Holy Wars"
by John Pilger [http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/14254-the-real-invasion-of-africa-and-other-recent-not-made-for-hollywood-holy-wars]:
The "Islamic terrorism" that is an excuse for the enduring theft of Africa's vast store of minerals was all but invented by US, Pakistani and British intelligence agencies, which created the mujahedin of al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
A full-scale invasion of Africa is under way. The United States is deploying troops in 35 African countries, beginning with Libya, Sudan, Algeria and Niger. Reported by the Associated Press on Christmas Day, this was missing from most Anglo-American media.
The invasion has almost nothing to do with "Islamism," and almost everything to do with the acquisition of resources - notably minerals - and an accelerating rivalry with China. Unlike China, the US and its allies are prepared to use a degree of violence demonstrated in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Palestine. As in the cold war, a division of labor requires that Western journalism and popular culture provide the cover of a holy war against a "menacing arc" of Islamic extremism, no different from the bogus "red menace" of a worldwide communist conspiracy.
Reminiscent of the Scramble for Africa in the late 19th century, the US Africa Command (AFRICOM) has built a network of supplicants among collaborative African regimes eager for American bribes and armaments. Last year, AFRICOM staged Operation Africa Endeavor, with the armed forces of 34 African nations taking part, commanded by the US military.
AFRICOM'S "soldier to soldier" doctrine embeds US officers at every level of command, from general to warrant officer. Only pith helmets are missing.
It is as if Africa's proud history of liberation, from Patrice Lumumba to Nelson Mandela, is consigned to oblivion by a new master's black colonial elite whose "historic mission," warned Frantz Fanon half a century ago, is the promotion of "a capitalism rampant, though camouflaged."
A striking example is the eastern Congo, a treasure trove of strategic minerals, controlled by an atrocious rebel group known as the M23, which in turn is run by Uganda and Rwanda, the proxies of Washington.
Long planned as a "mission" for NATO, not to mention the ever-zealous French, whose colonial lost causes remain on permanent standby, the war on Africa became urgent in 2011 when the Arab world appeared to be liberating itself from the Mubaraks and other clients of Washington and Europe. The hysteria this caused in imperial capitals cannot be exaggerated. NATO bombers were dispatched not to Tunis or Cairo but Libya, where Muammar el-Qaddafi ruled over Africa's largest oil reserves. With the Libyan city of Sirte reduced to rubble, the British Special Air Service (SAS) directed the "rebel" militias in what has since been exposed as a racist bloodbath.
The Tuareg, the indigenous people of the Sahara, whose Berber fighters el-Qaddafi had protected, fled home across Algeria to Mali, where the Tuareg have been claiming a separate state since the 1960s. As the ever-watchful Patrick Cockburn points out, it is this local dispute, not al-Qaeda, that the West fears most in northwest Africa ... "poor though the Tuareg may be, they are often living on top of great reserves of oil, gas, uranium and other valuable minerals."
Almost certainly the consequence of a French/US attack on Mali on January 13, a siege at a gas complex in Algeria ended bloodily, inspiring a 9/11 moment in David Cameron. The former Carlton TV PR man raged about a "global threat" requiring "decades" of western violence. He meant implantation of the west's business plan for Africa, together with the rape of multi-ethnic Syria and the conquest of independent Iran.
Cameron has now ordered British troops to Mali, and sent a Royal Air Force drone, while his verbose military chief, Gen. Sir David Richards, has addressed "a very clear message to jihadists worldwide: Don't dangle and tangle with us. We will deal with it robustly"- exactly what jihadists want to hear. The trail of blood of British army terror victims, all Muslims, and their "systemic" torture cases currently heading to court, add necessary irony to the general's words. I once experienced Sir David's "robust" ways when I asked him if he had read the courageous Afghan feminist Malalai Joya's description of the barbaric behavior of westerners and their clients in her country. "You are an apologist for the Taliban" was his reply. (He later apologized).
These bleak comedians are straight out of Evelyn Waugh and allow us to feel the bracing breeze of history and hypocrisy. The "Islamic terrorism" that is their excuse for the enduring theft of Africa's riches was all but invented by them. There is no longer any excuse to swallow the BBC/CNN line and not know the truth. Read Mark Curtis's Secret Affairs: Britain's Collusion with Radical Islam, or John Cooley's Unholy Wars: Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism, or The Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was midwife to the birth of modern fundamentalist terror. In effect, the mujahedin of al-Qaeda and the Taliban were created by the CIA, its Pakistani equivalent, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and Britain's MI6.
Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser, describes a secret presidential directive in 1979 that began what became the current "war on terror." For 17 years, the US deliberately cultivated bank-rolled, armed and brainwashed jihadi extremists that "steeped a generation in violence." Code-named Operation Cyclone, this was the "great game" to bring down the Soviet Union, but brought down the Twin Towers.
Since then, the news that intelligent, educated people both dispense and ingest has become a kind of Disney journalism, fortified, as ever, by Hollywood's license to lie, and lie. There is the coming DreamWorks movie about WikiLeaks, a fabrication inspired by a book of perfidious tittle-tattle by two enriched Guardian journalists; and there is Zero Dark Thirty, which promotes torture and murder, directed by the Oscar-winning Kathryn Bigelow, the Leni Riefenstah of our time, promoting her master's voice as did the Fuhrer's pet film-maker. Such is the one-way mirror through which we barely glimpse what power does in our name.


2013-09-05 "AFRICOM's Gigantic 'Small Footprint'; The Startling Size, Scope, and Growth of U.S. Military Operations on the African Continent"
by Nick Turse from "TomDispatch" [http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175743/tomgram%3A_nick_turse%2C_africom's_gigantic_%22small_footprint%22/]:
The U.S. Military’s Pivot to Africa, 2012-2013

Key to the Map of the U.S. Military’s Pivot to Africa, 2012-2013
* Green markers: U.S. military training, advising, or tactical deployments during 2013
* Yellow markers: U.S. military training, advising, or tactical deployments during 2012
* Purple marker: U.S. "security cooperation"
* Red markers: Army National Guard partnerships
* Blue markers: U.S. bases, forward operating sites (FOSes), contingency security locations (CSLs), contingency locations (CLs), airports with fueling agreements, and various shared facilities
* Green push pins: U.S. military training/advising of indigenous troops carried out in a third country during 2013
* Yellow push pins: U.S. military training/advising of indigenous troops carried out in a third country during 2012
---
They’re involved in Algeria and Angola, Benin and Botswana, Burkina Faso and Burundi, Cameroon and the Cape Verde Islands.  And that’s just the ABCs of the situation.  Skip to the end of the alphabet and the story remains the same: Senegal and the Seychelles, Togo and Tunisia, Uganda and Zambia.  From north to south, east to west, the Horn of Africa to the Sahel, the heart of the continent to the islands off its coasts, the U.S. military is at work.  Base construction, security cooperation engagements, training exercises, advisory deployments, special operations missions, and a growing logistics network, all undeniable evidence of expansion -- except at U.S. Africa Command.

To hear AFRICOM tell it, U.S. military involvement on the continent ranges from the miniscule to the microscopic.  The command is adamant that it has only a single “military base” in all of Africa: Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti.  The head of the command insists that the U.S. military maintains a “small footprint” on the continent [http://www.voanews.com/content/us-military-pays-close-attention-to-boko-haram-militants/1681488.html]. AFRICOM’s chief spokesman has consistently minimized the scope of its operations and the number of facilities it maintains or shares with host nations, asserting that only “a small presence of personnel who conduct short-duration engagements” are operating from “several locations” on the continent at any given time.

With the war in Iraq over and the conflict in Afghanistan winding down, the U.S. military is deploying its forces far beyond declared combat zones.  In recent years, for example, Washington has very publicly proclaimed a “pivot to Asia,” a “rebalancing” of its military resources eastward, without actually carrying out wholesale policy changes.  Elsewhere, however, from the Middle East to South America, the Pentagon is increasingly engaged in shadowy operations whose details emerge piecemeal and are rarely examined in a comprehensive way.  Nowhere is this truer than in Africa.  To the media and the American people, officials insist the U.S. military is engaged in small-scale, innocuous operations there.  Out of public earshot, officers running America’s secret wars say: “Africa is the battlefield of tomorrow, today.”

The proof is in the details -- a seemingly ceaseless string of projects, operations, and engagements.  Each mission, as AFRICOM insists, may be relatively limited and each footprint might be “small” on its own, but taken as a whole, U.S. military operations are sweeping and expansive.  Evidence of an American pivot to Africa is almost everywhere on the continent.  Few, however, have paid much notice.

If the proverbial picture is worth a thousand words, then what’s a map worth? Take, for instance, the one created by TomDispatch that documents U.S. military outposts, construction, security cooperation, and deployments in Africa.  It looks like a field of mushrooms after a monsoon.  U.S. Africa Command recognizes 54 countries on the continent, but refuses to say in which ones (or even in how many) it now conducts operations. An investigation by TomDispatch has found recent U.S. military involvement with no fewer than 49 African nations.

In some, the U.S. maintains bases, even if under other names. In others, it trains local partners and proxies to battle militants ranging from Somalia’s al-Shabab and Nigeria’s Boko Haram to members of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.  Elsewhere, it is building facilities for its allies or infrastructure for locals. Many African nations are home to multiple U.S. military projects. Despite what AFRICOM officials say, a careful reading of internal briefings, contracts, and other official documents, as well as open source information, including the command’s own press releases and news items, reveals that military operations in Africa are already vast and will be expanding for the foreseeable future. 

A Base by Any Other Name...

What does the U.S. military footprint in Africa look like? Colonel Tom Davis, AFRICOM’s Director of Public Affairs, is unequivocal: “Other than our base at Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti, we do not have military bases in Africa, nor do we have plans to establish any.” He admits only that the U.S. has “temporary facilities elsewhere… that support much smaller numbers of personnel, usually for a specific activity.”

AFRICOM’s chief of media engagement Benjamin Benson echoes this, telling me that it’s almost impossible to offer a list of forward operating bases. “Places that [U.S. forces] might be, the range of possible locations can get really big, but can provide a really skewed image of where we are... versus other places where we have ongoing operations. So, in terms of providing a number, I’d be at a loss of how to quantify this.”

A briefing prepared last year by Captain Rick Cook, the chief of AFRICOM’s Engineering Division, tells a different story, making reference to forward operating sites or FOSes (long-term locations), cooperative security locations or CSLs (which troops periodically rotate in and out of), and contingency locations or CLs (which are used only during ongoing operations). A separate briefing prepared last year by Lieutenant Colonel David Knellinger references seven cooperative security locations across Africa whose whereabouts are classified.  A third briefing, produced in July of 2012 by U.S. Army Africa, identifies one of the CSL sites as Entebbe, Uganda, a location from which U.S. contractors have flown secret surveillance missions using innocuous-looking, white Pilatus PC-12 turboprop airplanes, according to an investigation by the Washington Post.

The 2012 U.S. Army Africa briefing materials obtained by TomDispatch reference plans to build six new gates to the Entebbe compound, 11 new “containerized housing units,” new guard stations, new perimeter and security fencing, enhanced security lighting and new concrete access ramps, among other improvements.   Satellite photos indicate that many, if not all, of these upgrades have, indeed, taken place.

A 2009 image (above left) shows a barebones compound of dirt and grass tucked away on a Ugandan air base with just a few aircraft surrounding it.  A satellite photo of the compound from earlier this year (above right) shows a strikingly more built-up camp surrounded by a swarm of helicopters and white airplanes.

Initially, AFRICOM’s Benjamin Benson refused to comment on the construction or the number of aircraft, insisting that the command had no “public information” about it. Confronted with the 2013 satellite photo, Benson reviewed it and offered a reply that neither confirmed nor denied that the site was a U.S. facility, but cautioned me about using “uncorroborated data.” (Benson failed to respond to my request to corroborate the data through a site visit.) “I have no way of knowing where the photo was taken and how it was modified,” he told me. “Assuming the location is Entebbe, as you suggest, I would again argue that the aircraft could belong to anyone… It would be irresponsible of me to speculate on the missions, roles, or ownership of these aircraft.” He went on to suggest, however, that the aircraft might belong to the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) which does have a presence at the Entebbe air base. A request for comment from MONUSCO went unanswered before this article went to press.

This buildup may only be the beginning for Entebbe CSL. Recent contracting documents examined by TomDispatch indicate that AFRICOM is considering an additional surge of air assets there -- specifically hiring a private contractor to provide further “dedicated fixed-wing airlift services for movement of Department of Defense (DoD) personnel and cargo in the Central African Region.” This mercenary air force would keep as many as three planes in the air at the same time on any given day, logging a total of about 70 to 100 hours per week. If the military goes ahead with these plans, the aircraft would ferry troops, weapons, and other materiel within Uganda and to the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and South Sudan.

Another key, if little noticed, U.S. outpost in Africa is located in Ouagadougou, the capital of Burkina Faso. An airbase there serves as the home of a Joint Special Operations Air Detachment, as well as the Trans-Sahara Short Take-Off and Landing Airlift Support initiative. According to military documents, that “initiative” supports “high-risk activities” carried out by elite forces from Joint Special Operations Task Force-Trans Sahara. Lieutenant Colonel Scott Rawlinson, a spokesman for Special Operations Command Africa, told me that it provides “emergency casualty evacuation support to small team engagements with partner nations throughout the Sahel,” although official documents note that such actions have historically accounted for only 10% of its monthly flight hours.

While Rawlinson demurred from discussing the scope of the program, citing operational security concerns, military documents again indicate that, whatever its goals, it is expanding rapidly. Between March and December 2012, for example, the initiative flew 233 sorties. In the first three months of this year, it carried out 193.

In July, Berry Aviation, a Texas-based longtime Pentagon contractor, was awarded a nearly $50 million contract to provide aircraft and personnel for “Trans-Sahara Short Take-Off and Landing services.”  Under the terms of the deal, Berry will “perform casualty evacuation, personnel airlift, cargo airlift, as well as personnel and cargo aerial delivery services throughout the Trans-Sahara of Africa,” according to a statement from the company. Contracting documents indicate that Algeria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, and Tunisia are the “most likely locations for missions.”

Special Ops in Africa

Ouagadougou is just one site for expanding U.S. air operations in Africa.  Last year, the 435th Military Construction Flight (MCF) -- a rapid-response mobile construction team -- revitalized an airfield in South Sudan for Special Operations Command Africa, according to the unit’s commander, Air Force lieutenant Alexander Graboski.  Before that, the team also “installed a runway lighting system to enable 24-hour operations” at the outpost.  Graboski states that the Air Force’s 435th MCF “has been called upon many times by Special Operations Command Africa to send small teams to perform work in austere locations.” This trend looks as if it will continue. According to a briefing prepared earlier this year by Hugh Denny of the Army Corps of Engineers, plans have been drawn up for Special Operations Command Africa “operations support” facilities to be situated in “multiple locations.”

AFRICOM spokesman Benjamin Benson refused to answer questions about SOCAFRICA facilities, and would not comment on the locations of missions by an elite, quick-response force known as Naval Special Warfare Unit 10 (NSWU 10).  But according to Captain Robert Smith, the commander of Naval Special Warfare Group Two, NSWU 10 has been engaged “with strategic countries such as Uganda, Somalia, [and] Nigeria.”

Captain J. Dane Thorleifson, NSWU 10’s outgoing commander, recently mentioned deployments in six “austere locations” in Africa and “every other month contingency operations -- Libya, Tunisia, [and] POTUS,” evidently a reference to President Obama’s three-nation trip to Africa in July.  Thorleifson, who led the unit from July 2011 to July 2013, also said NSWU 10 had been involved in training “proxy” forces, specifically “building critical host nation security capacity; enabling, advising, and assisting our African CT [counterterror] partner forces so they can swiftly counter and destroy al-Shabab, AQIM [Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb], and Boko Haram.”

Nzara in South Sudan is one of a string of shadowy forward operating posts on the continent where U.S. Special Operations Forces have been stationed in recent years. Other sites include Obo and Djema in the Central Africa Republic and Dungu in the Democratic Republic of Congo.  According to Lieutenant Colonel Guillaume Beaurpere, the commander of the 3rd Battalion, 10th Special Forces Group, “advisory assistance at forward outposts was directly responsible for the establishment of combined operations fusion centers where military commanders, local security officials, and a host of international and non-governmental organizations could share information about regional insurgent activity and coordinate military activities with civil authorities.”

Drone bases are also expanding.  In February, the U.S. announced the establishment of a new drone facility in Niger.  Later in the spring, AFRICOM spokesman Benjamin Benson confirmed to TomDispatch that U.S. air operations conducted from Base Aerienne 101 at Diori Hamani International Airport in Niamey, Niger’s capital, were providing “support for intelligence collection with French forces conducting operations in Mali and with other partners in the region.”  More recently, the New York Times noted that what began as the deployment of one Predator drone to Niger had expanded to encompass daily flights by one of two larger, more advanced Reaper remotely piloted aircraft, supported by 120 Air Force personnel.

Additionally, the U.S. has flown drones out of the Seychelles Islands and Ethiopia’s Arba Minch Airport.

When it comes to expanding U.S. outposts in Africa, the Navy has also been active.  It maintains a forward operating location -- manned mostly by Seabees, Civil Affairs personnel, and force-protection troops -- known as Camp Gilbert in Dire Dawa, Ethiopia.  Since 2004, U.S. troops have been stationed at a Kenyan naval base known as Camp Simba at Manda Bay.  AFRICOM’s Benson portrayed operations there as relatively minor, typified by “short-term training and engagement activities.”  The 60 or so “core” troops stationed there, he said, are also primarily Civil Affairs, Seabees, and security personnel who take part in “military-to-military engagements with Kenyan forces and humanitarian initiatives.”

An AFRICOM briefing earlier this year suggested, however, that the base is destined to be more than a backwater post.  It called attention to improvements in water and power infrastructure and an extension of the runway at the airfield, as well as greater “surge capacity” for bringing in forces in the future.  A second briefing, prepared by the Navy and obtained by TomDispatch, details nine key infrastructure upgrades that are on the drawing board, underway, or completed.

In addition to extending and improving that runway, they include providing more potable water storage, latrines, and lodgings to accommodate a future “surge” of troops, doubling the capacity of washer and dryer units, upgrading dining facilities, improving roadways and boat ramps, providing fuel storage, and installing a new generator to handle additional demands for power.  In a March article in the National Journal, James Kitfield, who visited the base, shed additional light on expansion there.  “Navy Seabee engineers,” he wrote, “...have been working round-the-clock shifts for months to finish a runway extension before the rainy season arrives. Once completed, it will allow larger aircraft like C-130s to land and supply Americans or African Union troops.”

AFRICOM’s Benson tells TomDispatch that the U.S. military also makes use of six buildings located on Kenyan military bases at the airport and seaport of Mombasa.  In addition, he verified that it has used Léopold Sédar Senghor International Airport in Senegal for refueling stops as well as the “transportation of teams participating in security cooperation activities” such as training missions.  He confirmed a similar deal for the use of Addis Ababa Bole International Airport in Ethiopia.

While Benson refused additional comment, official documents indicate that the U.S. has similar agreements for the use of Nsimalen Airport and Douala International Airport in Cameroon, Amílcar Cabral International Airport and Praia International Airport in Cape Verde, N'Djamena International Airport in Chad, Cairo International Airport in Egypt, Jomo Kenyatta International Airport and Moi International Airport in Kenya, Kotoka International Airport in Ghana, ‎ Marrakech-Menara Airport in Morocco, Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Nigeria, Seychelles International Airport in the Seychelles, Sir Seretse Khama International Airport in Botswana, Bamako-Senou International Airport in Mali, and Tunis-Carthage International Airport in Tunisia.  ‎All told, according to Sam Cooks, a liaison officer with the Defense Logistics Agency, the U.S. military now has 29 agreements to use international airports in Africa as refueling centers.

In addition, U.S. Africa Command has built a sophisticated logistics system, officially known as the AFRICOM Surface Distribution Network, but colloquially referred to as the “new spice route.” It connects posts in Manda Bay, Garissa, and Mombasa in Kenya, Kampala and Entebbe in Uganda, Dire Dawa in Ethiopia, as well as crucial port facilities used by the Navy’s CTF-53 (“Commander, Task Force, Five Three”) in Djibouti, which are collectively referred to as “the port of Djibouti” by the military.  Other key ports on the continent, according to Lieutenant Colonel Wade Lawrence of U.S. Transportation Command, include Ghana’s Tema and Senegal’s Dakar.

The U.S. maintains 10 marine gas and oil bunker locations in eight African nations, according to the Defense Logistics Agency. AFRICOM’s Benjamin Benson refuses to name the countries, but recent military contracting documents list key fuel bunker locations in Douala, Cameroon; Mindelo, Cape Verde; Abidjan, Cote D’Ivoire; Port Gentil, Gabon; Sekondi, Ghana; Mombasa, Kenya; Port Luis, Mauritius; Walvis Bay, Namibia; Lagos, Nigeria; Port Victoria, Seychelles; Durban, South Africa; and Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.

The U.S. also continues to maintain a long-time Naval Medical Research Unit, known as NAMRU-3, in Cairo, Egypt.  Another little-noticed medical investigation component, the U.S. Army Research Unit - Kenya, operates from facilities in Kisumu and Kericho.

(In and) Out of Africa

When considering the scope and rapid expansion of U.S. military activities in Africa, it’s important to keep in mind that certain key “African” bases are actually located off the continent.  Keeping a semblance of a “light footprint” there, AFRICOM’s headquarters is located at Kelley Barracks in Stuttgart-Moehringen, Germany.  In June, Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that the base in Stuttgart and the U.S. Air Force’s Air Operations Center in Ramstein were both integral to drone operations in Africa.

Key logistics support hubs for AFRICOM are located in Rota, Spain; Aruba in the Lesser Antilles; and Souda Bay, Greece, as well as at Ramstein.  The command also maintains a forward operating site on Britain’s Ascension Island, located about 1,000 miles off the coast of Africa in the South Atlantic, but refused requests for further information about its role in operations.

Another important logistics facility is located in Sigonella on the island of Sicily. Italy, it turns out, is an especially crucial component of U.S. operations in Africa.  Special-Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force Africa, which provides teams of Marines and sailors for “small-footprint theater security cooperation engagements” across the continent, is based at Naval Air Station Sigonella.  It has, according to AFRICOM’s Benjamin Benson, recently deployed personnel to Botswana, Liberia, Djibouti, Burundi, Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Tunisia, and Senegal.

In the future, U.S. Army Africa will be based at Caserma Del Din in northern Italy, adjacent to the recently completed home of the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team.  A 2012 U.S. Army Africa briefing indicates that construction projects at the Caserma Del Din base will continue through 2018. The reported price-tag for the entire complex:  $310 million. 

A Big Base Gets Bigger

While that sum is sizeable, it’s surpassed by spending on the lone official U.S. base on the African continent, Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti.  That former French Foreign Legion post has been on a decade-long growth spurt.

In 2002, the U.S. dispatched personnel to Africa as part of Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa (CJTF-HOA).  The next year, CJTF-HOA took up residence at Camp Lemonnier, where it resides to this day.  In 2005, the U.S. struck a five-year land-use agreement with the Djiboutian government and exercised the first of two five-year renewal options in late 2010.  In 2006, the U.S. signed a separate agreement to expand the camp’s boundaries to 500 acres.

According to AFRICOM’s Benson, between 2009 and 2012, $390 million was spent on construction at Camp Lemonnier.  In recent years, the outpost was transformed by the addition of an electric power plant, enhanced water storage and treatment facilities, a dining hall, more facilities for Special Operations Command, and the expansion of aircraft taxiways and parking aprons.

A briefing prepared earlier this year by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command lists a plethora of projects currently underway or poised to begin, including an aircraft maintenance hangar, a telecommunications facility, a fire station, additional security fencing, an ammunition supply facility, interior paved roads, a general purpose warehouse, maintenance shelters for aircraft, an aircraft logistics apron, taxiway enhancements, expeditionary lodging, a combat aircraft loading apron, and a taxiway extension on the east side of the airfield.

Navy documents detail the price tag of this year’s proposed projects, including $7.5 million to be spent on containerized living units and workspaces, $22 million for cold storage and the expansion of dining facilities, $27 million for a fitness center, $43 million for a joint headquarters facility, and a whopping $220 million for a Special Operations Compound, also referred to as “Task Force Compound.”

According to a 2012 briefing by Lieutenant Colonel David Knellinger, the Special Operations Compound will eventually include at least 18 new facilities, including a two-story joint operations center, a two-story tactical operations center, two five-story barracks, a large motor pool facility, a supply warehouse, and an aircraft hangar with an adjacent air operations center.

A document produced earlier this year by Lieutenant Troy Gilbert, an infrastructure planner with AFRICOM’s engineer division, lists almost $400 million in “emergency” military construction at Camp Lemonnier, including work on the special operations compound and more than $150 million for a new combat aircraft loading area.  Navy documents, for their part, estimate that construction at Camp Lemonnier will continue at $70 million to $100 million annually, with future projects to include a $20 million wastewater treatment plant, a $40 million medical and dental center, and more than $150 million in troop housing.

Rules of Engagement

In addition, the U.S. military has been supporting construction all over Africa for its allies.  A report by Hugh Denny of the Army Corps of Engineers issued earlier this year references 79 such projects in 33 countries between 2011 and 2013, including Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, Cote D’Ivoire, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Tanzania, Tunisia, The Gambia, Togo, Uganda, and Zambia.  The reported price-tag: $48 million.

Senegal has, for example, received a $1.2 million “peacekeeping operations training center” under the auspices of the U.S. Africa Contingency Operations Training and Assistance (ACOTA) program. ACOTA has also supported training center projects in Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Niger, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania, Togo, and Uganda.

The U.S. is planning to finance the construction of barracks and other facilities for Ghana’s armed forces.  AFRICOM’s Benson also confirmed to TomDispatch that the Army Corps of Engineers has plans to “equip and refurbish five military border security posts in Djibouti along the Somalia/Somaliland border.”  In Kenya, U.S. Special Operations Forces have “played a crucial role in infrastructure investments for the Kenyan Special Operations Regiment and especially in the establishment of the Kenyan Ranger school,” according to Lieutenant Colonel Guillaume Beaurpere of the 3rd Battalion, 10th Special Forces Group.

AFRICOM’s “humanitarian assistance” program is also expansive.  A 2013 Navy briefing lists $7.1 million in humanitarian construction projects -- like schools, orphanages, and medical facilities -- in 19 countries from Comoros and Guinea-Bissau to Rwanda.  Hugh Denny’s report also lists nine Army Corps of Engineers “security assistance” efforts, valued at more than $12 million, carried out during 2012 and 2013, as well as 15 additional “security cooperation” projects worth more than $22 million in countries across Africa.

A Deluge of Deployments

In addition to creating or maintaining bases and engaging in military construction across the continent, the U.S. is involved in near constant training and advisory missions.  According to AFRICOM’s Colonel Tom Davis, the command is slated to carry out 14 major bilateral and multilateral exercises by the end of this year.  These include Saharan Express 2013, which brought together forces from Cape Verde, Cote d’Ivoire, The Gambia, Liberia, Mauritania, Morocco, Senegal, and Sierra Leone, among other nations, for maritime security training; Obangame Express 2013, a counter-piracy exercise involving the armed forces of many nations, including Benin, Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Nigeria, Republic of Congo, São Tomé and Príncipe, and Togo; and Africa Endeavor 2013, in which the militaries of Djibouti, Burundi, Cote d'Ivoire, Zambia, and 34 other African nations took part.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.  As Davis told TomDispatch, “We also conduct some type of military training or military-to-military engagement or activity with nearly every country on the African continent.”  A cursory look at just some of U.S. missions this spring drives home the true extent of the growing U.S. engagement in Africa.

In January, for instance, the U.S. Air Force began transporting French troops to Mali to counter Islamist forces there.  At a facility in Nairobi, Kenya, AFRICOM provided military intelligence training to junior officers from Kenya, Uganda, Burundi, Ethiopia, Tanzania, and South Sudan.  In January and February, Special Operations Forces personnel conducted a joint exercise code-named Silent Warrior with Cameroonian soldiers.  February saw South African troops travel all the way to Chiang Mai, Thailand, to take part in Cobra Gold 2013, a multinational training exercise cosponsored by the U.S. military.

In March, Navy personnel worked with members of Cape Verde’s armed forces, while Kentucky National Guard troops spent a week advising soldiers from the Comoros Islands.  That same month, members of Special-Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force Africa deployed to the Singo Peace Support Training Center in Uganda to work with Ugandan soldiers prior to their assignment to the African Union Mission in Somalia.  Over the course of the spring, members of the task force would also mentor local troops in Burundi, Cameroon, Ghana, Burkina Faso, the Seychelles, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Liberia.

In April, members of the task force also began training Senegalese commandos at Bel-Air military base in Dakar, while Navy personnel deployed to Mozambique to school civilians in demining techniques. Meanwhile, Marines traveled to Morocco to conduct a training exercise code-named African Lion 13 with that country’s military.  In May, Army troops were sent to Lomé, Togo, to work with members of the Togolese Defense Force, as well as to Senga Bay, Malawi, to instruct soldiers there.

That same month, Navy personnel conducted a joint exercise in the Mediterranean Sea with their Egyptian counterparts.  In June, personnel from the Kentucky National Guard deployed to Djibouti to advise members of that country’s military on border security methods, while Seabees teamed up with the Tanzanian People’s Defense Force to build maritime security infrastructure.  That same month, the Air Force airlifted Liberian troops to Bamako, Mali, to conduct a six-month peacekeeping operation.

Limited or Limitless?

Counting countries in which it has bases or outposts or has done construction, and those with which it has conducted military exercises, advisory assignments, security cooperation, or training missions, the U.S. military, according to TomDispatch’s analysis, is involved with more than 90% of Africa’s 54 nations. While AFRICOM commander David Rodriguez maintains that the U.S. has only a “small footprint” on the continent, following those small footprints across the continent can be a breathtaking task.

It’s not hard to imagine why the U.S. military wants to maintain that “small footprint” fiction.  On occasion, military commanders couldn’t have been clearer on the subject.  “A direct and overt presence of U.S. forces on the African continent can cause consternation… with our own partners who take great pride in their post-colonial abilities to independently secure themselves,” wrote Lieutenant Colonel Guillaume Beaurpere earlier this year in the military trade publication Special Warfare. Special Operations Forces, he added, “must train to operate discreetly within these constraints and the cultural norms of the host nation.”

On a visit to the Pentagon earlier this summer, AFRICOM’s Rodriguez echoed the same point in candid comments to Voice of America: “The history of the African nations, the colonialism, all those things are what point to the reasons why we should… just use a small footprint."

And yet, however useful that imagery may be to the Pentagon, the U.S. military no longer has a small footprint in Africa.  Even the repeated claims that U.S. troops conduct only short-term. intermittent missions there has been officially contradicted.  This July, at a change of command ceremony for Naval Special Warfare Unit 10, a spokesman noted the creation and implementation of “a five-year engagement strategy that encompassed the transition from episodic training events to regionally-focused and persistent engagements in five Special Operations Command Africa priority countries.”

In a question-and-answer piece in Special Warfare earlier this year, Colonel John Deedrick, the commander of the 10th Special Forces Group, sounded off about his unit’s area of responsibility.  “We are widely employed throughout the continent,” he said. “These are not episodic activities.  We are there 365-days-a-year to share the burden, assist in shaping the environment, and exploit opportunities.”

Exploitation and “persistent engagement” are exactly what critics of U.S. military involvement in Africa have long feared, while blowback and the unforeseen consequences of U.S. military action on the continent have already contributed to catastrophic destabilization.

Despite some candid admissions by officers involved in shadowy operations, however, AFRICOM continues to insist that troop deployments are highly circumscribed.  The command will not, however, allow independent observers to make their own assessments.  Benson said AFRICOM does not “have a media visit program to regularly host journalists there.”

My own requests to report on U.S. operations on the continent were, in fact, rejected in short order.  “We will not make an exception in this case,” Benson wrote in a recent email and followed up by emphasizing that U.S. forces are deployed in Africa only “on a limited and temporary basis.”  TomDispatch’s own analysis -- and a mere glance at the map of recent missions -- indicates that there are, in fact, very few limits on where the U.S. military operates in Africa.

While Washington talks openly about rebalancing its military assets to Asia, a pivot to Africa is quietly and unmistakably underway.  With the ever-present possibility of blowback from shadowy operations on the continent, the odds are that the results of that pivot will become increasingly evident, whether or not Americans recognize them as such.  Behind closed doors, the military says: “Africa is the battlefield of tomorrow, today.”  It remains to be seen just when they’ll say the same to the American people.  

Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Advocate for a U.S. Department of Peacebuilding

Re-titled legislation to be introduced in House of Representatives early this year!
Tell Congress: Sign-on as co-sponsor!
The Peace Alliance has announced that soon after commencement of the 113th session of Congress, Representative Barbara Lee (CA-13) will introduce legislation calling for establishment of a cabinet-level United States Department of Peacebuilding. This is a new title for the Dept. of Peace bill, but it will follow very closely to H.R. 808, previously introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich.
Please urge your member of Congress to become an original co-sponsor of this critical legislation or register his or her support with Representative Lee's office today.  http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/696/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=12206
For those of you with newly elected House Members, you will not be able to use this tool, which will not be updated until later this month.  Instead, call or write your Congressperson.  Find your Congressperson at http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/.

The time to prioritize peacebuilding is now. A U.S. Department of Peacebuilding would save lives and money by promoting and supporting effective policies and programs that address the root causes of violence and help all citizens to develop peaceful conflict resolution skills.
For more information, go to http://www.thepeacealliance.org/issues-advocacy/department-of-peace/index.html.

Monday, December 24, 2012

Stand with the People of Syria!

As the monopolist corporations consolidate their power over the Free (Market) World, the alliance of the USA, the UKGB, and Israel, used as enforcers of the regime of global economic dictatorship, have been using chemical weapons and subsidizing terrorist organizations to kill people within Syria in order to destabilize their society. As seen in the history of their invasions of Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan, the sole objective of this program is the placement of a new regime which protects the interests of the monopolist corporations, and not to uphold Human Rights or to protect the health and education of the People!
* Stand against War in Syria! [link]

* Revolutionary analysis of the Syria revolution and liberated Kurdistan [link].
* United States Military personnel, tired of endless war and agony, are stirring in dissent. This development is being denied by the monopolist media, calling the dissent "faked" [link].

WHY LABOR SHOULD OPPOSE A U.S. ATTACK ON SYRIA!

from Labor Fightback Network [laborfightback.org] [973-944-8975] [conference@laborfightback.org]:
At a time when 27 million U.S. workers are unemployed or underemployed and severe cuts in social programs are being implemented under the sequestration, the Obama administration is focused instead on finalizing plans to unleash a bombing attack on Syria.
We strongly believe that labor and our community partners should vehemently oppose such an attack.
After all, the government destroyed Iraq at a cost of 4,488 U.S. lives, tens of thousands casualties and billions of dollars, and at a cost of a million Iraqi lives and casualties, all based on a lie that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. And this came after the U.S. supported Iraq's use of chemical weapons against Iran in the 1980s. Washington's outrage is indeed selective.
The U.S. government attacked Afghanistan and 12 years later the war against that country is still going on with a further loss of human life and at a cost of $10 billion a month. But what benefit has that war brought to the working class majority of either country?
Now  a new U.S. war is apparently about to commence, this time against Syria. Will Iran be next? And which country will be the enemy after Iran?
A lot of terrible things are taking place not just in Syria but also in other parts of the world. But the U.S. has no right to intervene and dictate the course of events in other lands. We are not the world's cop and have no right to go from one hot spot to the next, demanding that countries comply with what the U.S. government directs them to do.
The cornerstone of international law is that each country must decide its own destiny, free from outside intervention and dictation. Unfortunately, the U.S. has a long history of waging aggressive wars -- even when it faces no immediate threat as is the case with Syria -- because it does not approve of the regimes and policies of other countries. Vietnam is a classic example of where such a war was waged with enormous loss of blood and treasure, while the warmakers suffered a staggering defeat.
Labor must be unconditionally against any military aggression by the U.S. government -- the only government in the world that used atomic weapons and that later used Agent Orange in Vietnam and Depleted Uranium in Iraq.
The American people are sick and tired of endless wars and occupations. All polls show an overwhelming majority of the public opposes a U.S. strike against Syria.
We urge our union brothers and sisters -- and all of labor's allies -- to speak out now and demand of the U.S. government: "Money for Jobs and Education, Not for Wars and Occupations! Hands Off Syria!"


WILPF Statement on Syria, chemical weapons, and avoiding military intervention

The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) welcomes the decision by the British Parliament to refuse the endorsement of military action against Syria. Parliament upheld the principle that the use of chemical weapons can never be justified, but reasserted the importance of international law and the UN Charter in dictating any response by the international community. However, media reports indicate that the US government is still intent on a military strike against Syria, even without UK support.
It has been WILPF’s position since the first reports of use of gas that the use of chemical weapons is a serious violation of international law, regardless of which party to the conflict perpetrated the attack. But the use of chemical weapons, however abhorrent and illegal, should not be used as a pretext for military intervention. Other options are available and must be pursued.

Chemical weapons and international law -
There is no doubt that the use of chemical weapons in armed conflict is a violation of international law. The 1925 Geneva Protocol prohibits the use of chemical and biological weapons in war. Furthermore, the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) outlaws the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, transfer, or use of chemical weapons. While Syria is party only to the 1925 Geneva Protocol and not the CWC, legal experts and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) have pointed out that these agreements have created a principle against the use of chemical weapons through customary international law.
This means the prohibition against using chemical weapons is just as binding as a treaty and is similarly binding on armed groups. Consequently, if either the government or a rebel faction that uses chemical weapons, they can be held accountable for this violation of international law. The alleged use of chemical weapons must not be used as a pretext for military intervention.

Against military intervention -
Rather than rushing to military intervention or war, the international community must respond in conformity with international law. International legal obligations permit military intervention only under specific circumstances, none of which are applicable in this situation.
The rhetoric of the governments pushing for intervention is more akin to retribution and punishment than justice in accordance with international law. It presupposes both the “right” of Western governments to act as global police and the legitimacy of the use of force to resolve international problems.
The consequences of military intervention are inevitable: collateral damage, exacerbation of the conflict and suffering of civilians, radicalization of forces in the region, and making the prospect of a peaceful negotiation even more remote. Military intervention will not help the Syrian people secure relief from the violence nor will it result in a peaceful transition to a democratic and accountable government. A dialogue must happen and it must happen with the voices of those who advocate a nonviolent solution.

Alternative options -
Alternatives to armed force have been carefully constructed over decades and there are systems in place that could and should be used.

1. Ensure effective investigation of the attack through an extension of the existing mandate of the UN inspections. The UN inspections must be allowed to be completed. The inspection team has so far collected samples and interviewed victims and witnesses. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has argued that the team must be allowed to do its job and establish the facts, pushing back against the US and UK government’s assertions of “certainty” about the facts of the case and their demands that the inspection team leave the country. Once the inspectors have determined whether chemical weapons were used and perhaps the origins of these weapons, the international community should then act in accordance with international law in its response.

2. Seek a UN Security Council resolution to secure the hand-over of any WMD in the possession of any party to the conflict. The first obligation on the UN Security Council is to ensure the prevention of further chemical weapons use. Consequently, it should promulgate a resolution to facilitate the seizure of the prohibited weapons. This could get the support of the Russian government, which has supported the prohibition of use of chemical weapons and which seems to have considerable influence over the Syrian government. Because of Russia’s strong participation in the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, (which has a larger geographical mandate than just Europe), the OSCE may also be able to secure the hand-over of the weapons.

3. Request the UN Security Council refer the matter to the Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICC has been established to bring justice when a state is unwilling or unable to do so, as would be the case here. There needs to be an investigation into the identification of the perpetrators and the nature of the command responsibility. Syria is not a party to the ICC but the UN Security Council can and should refer the matter to the office of the prosecutor and ensure that funds are available for investigation and indictment.

4. Support a political solution through inclusive peace talks. The political process developed to provide a political solution to the Syrian crisis through “Geneva I” talks in 2012 and planned “Geneva II” talks this year have been established to provide a political rather than military solution to the crisis. The first set of discussions developed a plan for a transitional government in Syria involving both government and opposition members. This discussion needs to be continued in Geneva II talks with strengthened support from permanent UN Security Council members. Pressure also needs to be strengthened for an inclusive process involving women on all sides as well as nonviolent humanitarian and women’s groups to ensure a strong peace process and outcome.

In the meantime, arms transfers to the Syrian government and rebel forces must stop. These arms flows have achieved only more bloodshed. In calling for those providing weapons to either side to stop, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon notes, “The military logic has given us a country on the verge of total destruction, a region in chaos and a global threat.  Why add more fuel to the fire?

Moving forward -
Some will question where the justice is in simply completing inspections and securing the weapons. Law is not about quick “fixes” often demanded by governments, or the immediate justice that is wanted by victims. However, it provides a process which is critical to engage with if we want to move away from violent retribution and towards processes of peace and justice. WILPF calls, yet again, for choosing peace over violence, and political over militarized solutions. Sustainable peace cannot be built on more violence.


ACTIVIST ALERT ON SYRIA
message from "Mt. Diablo Peace & Justice Center" [info@mtdpc.org] [55 Eckley Lane, Walnut Creek 94596]

MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD !
TAKE URGENT ACTION AGAINST USE OF MILITARY FORCE IN SYRIA!
Contact your Congressperson now!
A supposedly democratic nation can't have a more urgent and necessary debate than over the question of whether or not to attack another country. That's why the Constitution gives the power to declare war to Congress and not to the President acting alone.
Yesterday, Congresswoman Barbara Lee initiated a letter to President Obama insisting that he "consult and receive authorization from Congress before ordering the use of U.S. military force in Syria."
Two of our local Members of Congress, Rep. George Miller and John Garamendi have signed this letter: This was the right thing to do and we should recognize their efforts.  Please contact their offices and let them know of your support.
* Miller: [925-602-1880]
* Garamendi: [925-932-8899]
Two other local Members have not yet signed on.  Please ask them to do so now!
Representative Jerry McNerny and Eric Swalwell will be at a Congressman on your Corner event tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. at UNCLE Credit Union main branch - Livermore.
* McNerney: [925-737-0727]
* Swalwell: [925-460-5100]
It doesn't take much time to make a quick phone call. You don't have to provide lengthly explanations or point-by-point arguments.  Just tell your Reps that you want Congress to vote and to vote NO.
If you really want to stop this war, the time to act is now!
Link to Barbara Lee letter and updates here 
AND...... PROTEST EVENT TOMORROW
Saturday August 31, 12 noon
"No New War vs. Syria"
Emergency Protests Across U.S.
Powell and Market Sts. - San Francisco
Peace is Possible!  


"Left and Right Join Together to Say ‘NO on Syria’ On August 30th beginning at Noon Joining a Nationwide Action"
message from the "Chico Peace & Justice Center" [526 Broadway, Chico, CA 95928]

Rally in Chico's Downtown Plaza -
Concerned residents will gather to mark their opposition to a hasty intervention into Syria. Speakers will call on the White House to slow down plans for a military intervention in Syria. This event is being organized by the student-led libertarian group Young Americans for Liberty and the progressive organization, the Chico Peace & Justice Center.
Shared concerns by both the left and the right include lack of evidence that the Assad regime in Syria was behind the use of chemical weapons in a suburb of Damascus on August 21, killing as many as 1,400 people according to US intelligence reports.  Emily Alma, long time activist, says, “The enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.  We cannot, we should not carelessly support the rebels.  Choosing sides in this conflict is reminiscent of Afghanistan in the late ‘80s.”
Beyond the lack of clear evidence, each group has its own concerns.  Ambrosia Krinsky, Assistant to the Director at the Chico Peace & Justice Center, said, “We reject the all-or-nothing mentality to this tragic situation.  Diplomacy must be part of the conversation.”
Concerns from the right include the costs of another war.  Thomas Childers, member of Young Americans for Liberty, says, “We cannot afford another war.  Attacking Syria could lead to a regional war.”
This gathering is part of a national call to action to stop a military intervention into Syria.


Hands Off Syria! Take action against U.S. intervention!
August 27th Statement from the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition [AnswerSF.org] [Answer@AnswerSF.org] [2969 Mission St., San Francisco] [415-821-6545]

Call to Action for actions the day of/after U.S. military action begins at Powell and Market Sts., San Francisco. 5pm (weekday) or 12pm (weekend)
Plan a demonstration in your city on the day of or the day after U.S. military action begins. Fill out our Event Listing form so we can help spread the word [link]!
Washington is on the march toward yet another war of aggression in the Middle East, this time targeting Syria. In the event of U.S. military strikes against Syria, the ANSWER Coalition is calling on organizations and individuals to take to the streets in opposition to what would be a destructive and criminal war by the U.S. government.
If there is a U.S./NATO attack on a weekday, an emergency response protest will take place in San Francisco at Powell & Market Sts., at 5 pm on the day of the attack, or if an attack takes place after 5 pm, the protest will be the following day. If the emergency response protest is on a weekend day, it will take place at 12 noon at Powell & Market Sts.
Despite the fact that an overwhelming majority of the American people are clearly opposed to U.S. intervention, the signs all point to war. In a recent Reuters poll, only 9 percent favored direct U.S. military intervention, and 89 percent opposed arming the Syrian opposition. But the tiny elite clique who really run the country are completely discounting the will of the people, making a mockery of their so-called “democracy.”
The U.S. 6th Fleet has deployed war ships to the eastern Mediterranean and is threatening to launch missile and air strikes against Syria. Not only are the White House and Pentagon openly threatening direct intervention, they are also moving to further arm the Syrian opposition. A U.S./NATO attack on Syria could well lead to a wider, regional war with grave and unpredictable consequences.

A staged provocation: a pretext for war -
The pretext for attacking Syria is the allegation that the Syrian government used chemical weapons last week in the suburbs of the capital, Damascus, just after a UN team had arrived in the country to investigate an earlier alleged use of chemical weapons. President Obama declared over a year ago that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government would cross a “red line,” triggering U.S. military action.
The idea that the Syrian government would launch a chemical weapons attack exactly at the moment when the UN team was in the country investigating chemical weapons defies all logic.
In a sign of their total disregard for the truth, the United States government has declared, in advance of any actual investigation, that the Syrian government is guilty of using chemical weapons. U.S. officials have stated that the United Nations weapons inspection team, which is today at the site near Damascus where hundreds of people died last week, is “too late.” In other words, the United States, along with Britain and France – the former colonizers of the region – have decided to use chemical weapons as an excuse to go to war.
We must remember the Iraq War in 2003, where “overwhelming evidence of weapons of mass destruction” was used as the pretext for a war that killed hundreds of thousands and tore Iraq apart. No such weapons were ever found.
If in fact chemical weapons were used in Syria last week, the far greater likelihood is that it was a staged provocation by the opposition to invite U.S./NATO intervention in order to save their weakening military position in the conflict. We have no reason to trust the U.S. government’s version of what happened. This is the same government that has routinely lied and deceived the American people on many issues, as was recently revealed by Edward Snowden’s leaks related to NSA spying.
U.S. foreign policy is not one of benign humanitarian concern, but one of Empire. Washington’s goal is control of the entire oil-rich and strategic Middle East region. To achieve this aim, U.S. leaders – Democrats and Republicans alike – have worked to destroy independent governments and popular movements in the region for more than six decades.
For the people of the United States, fighting against a U.S. intervention in Syria is of paramount importance to prevent the spread of war and destruction. The ANSWER Coalition is calling on all those opposed to this brutal war drive to take action against any U.S. attack on Syria! A broad coalition of organizations worked together in June and July 2013 for days of action opposing the U.S. role in Syria. We expect that the actions in the coming days and weeks will be of a similar unified character.


Aug. 27th, 2013 UNITED NATIONAL ANTIWAR COALITION (UNAC)
NO U.S. WAR ON SYRIA! 
TAKE ACTION NOW AND ORGANIZE EMERGENCY RESPONSE IF THERE IS AN ATTACK


Organize actions before an attack! Sign up here [link]!   
Secretary of State Kerry’s demagogic speech on August 26 on the situation in Syria makes it clear that the U.S. is serious about military action against the people of Syria.  Polls show that the overwhelming majority of Americans are against any further intervention.  However, as with the Iraq War, the government shows contempt and disregard for the will of the people.
UNAC calls for all antiwar and social justice organizations to prepare for a response if there is any military action by the U.S. in Syria.  We call upon all organizations to mobilize to take action opposing U.S. intervention before any military action.  We also call upon all organizations to work together and make plans for an emergency response on the day after any military action against Syria.  If your organization is making such plans, please click here and fill out the form so we can let others know.
The issue of chemical weapons is the cover the U.S. and its allies use to justify their illegal and immoral acts of war, just as the specter of WMD’s were used as the rationale for attacking Iraq.  Their real mission, as in Iraq, Libya, and elsewhere, is to force regime change in order to control energy resources and get compliant regimes in the region.  The claim that a bloody military attack on a country that poses no threat to the U.S. is needed to offer humanitarian assistance is the height of hypocrisy.  The result of the “humanitarian” invasion and ten-year occupation of Iraq is over a million Iraqi deaths and a country in ruin.
Military intervention will not bring peace to a people already engulfed in terrible violence and destruction.  Such intervention can only lead to more death and devastation.
We must do all we can to stay the hand of the U.S. government as it moves towards military intervention in Syria.  Please start organizing now for actions to oppose U.S. intervention in Syria.
Say NO to another US War!
Hands OFF Syria!

Dec. 24, 2012 UNITED NATIONAL ANTIWAR COALITION (UNAC)
STATEMENT ON SYRIA
Hands off Syria and Iran!    End the Drone Wars!
We Need Jobs, Education and Healthcare, Not Endless War!

The ominous signs of impending war with Syria escalate.  NATO is massing troops and military equipment on Syria's borders, and preparing to install missiles aimed at Syria.  U.S. warships are stationed off Syria’s coast. ‘Special operation’ units are readied.  The U.S. government has been supplying arms and logistical support to a few selected Syrian paramilitary groups favored by the U.S. as “replacements” for Assad.  The media bombards us with arguments that support foreign intervention, supposedly for “humanitarian reasons”.  Like WMD’s in Iraq, alarms are sounded, with no credible evidence, that Assad may unleash chemical weapons, thus establishing a pretext for invasion.
These are the facts that impel us to oppose any military, economic, diplomatic, or covert intervention aimed at controlling the internal affairs of Syria or any other country:
* The Syrian people in their majority, regardless of their political positions re: the current government, have rejected calling for foreign intervention, such as occurred in Libya.
* Sanctions harm the people of Syria by causing food shortages, power outages, and blocking the distribution of goods.
* The U.S. is directly involved in arming and training a few selected Syrian militias favorable to the U.S., contributing to the escalation of violence, direct foreign military intervention, and total destabilization. The people who always suffer the most are the people not engaged in the armed struggle.
* We see the results of ‘humanitarian’ U.S. wars and occupations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya today, where the people, especially women and children, are worse off than before, with millions dead, injured, and/or displaced, an infrastructure and economy in shambles, and where there is no peace.  A country that has a river of Iraqi, Afghan, and Libyan blood on its hands has no right to tell other countries what to do.
* The U.S. government’s goals in Syria are to gain dominance in a part of the world that holds the vast majority of the known oil reserves and to gain strategic advantage as it seeks to isolate and contain competitors like Russia and China.  The U.S. has no interest in democracy or the humanitarian well-being of a country’s peoples anywhere in the world, especially in areas where the U.S. has economic or strategic interests.
* The U.S. has a long history of thwarting the emerging economies and progressive initiatives of the third world while supporting repressive regimes.
While activists may hold different views of Syria’s internal political system, we must all agree that the U.S. government has no right to impose its will on other countries, especially those formerly colonized and exploited by the West.  In all cases, we must support the right of nations to self- determination – that is to be able to decide on and resolve internal conflicts free from any foreign intervention.
The United National Antiwar Coalition (UNAC) demands:
No U.S. or NATO intervention in the internal affairs of Syria!
No War!  No Sanctions!  No Intervention!
Self-determination for the Syrian people!
www.UNACpeace.org
12/24/12