Black Agenda Report
Black Agenda Report
News, commentary and analysis from the black left.

  • Home
  • Africa
  • African America
  • Education
  • Environment
  • International
  • Media and Culture
  • Political Economy
  • Radio
  • US Politics
  • War and Empire

Where Will the U.S. Strike Next in Africa?
08 Aug 2012
🖨️ Print Article

 

A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford

The U.S. is stalking Africa like an imperial predator. Eritrea is on the short list of who’s going to be attacked next. Eritrea, says the U.S., creates instability. However, “it is not little Eritrea that is destabilizing the Horn of Africa, but the United States, which has made the region a front line in its so-called War on Terror.”

 

Where Will the U.S. Strike Next in Africa?

A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford

“Eritrea’s real sin is to be one of the very few nations in Africa that do not have military relations with AFRICOM, the U.S. war machine.”

Under the direction of the United States, the UN Security Council recently extended sanctions for another year against the northeast African nation of Eritrea. The country of 6 million people, nestled against the Red Sea, is on America’s hit list. In the imperial double-speak of Washington, Eritrea is described as a “destabilizing” force in the region – which simply means the government in Asmara has refused to buckle under to U.S. military domination of the Horn of Africa.

Back in 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton threatened to “take action” – and, by that, she meant make war – against Eritrea if it did not stop supporting the Shabab resistance fighters in Somalia. There was no evidence that Eritrea was, in fact, arming the Shabab, and there is no evidence that Eritrea is doing so, now – as the UN Monitoring Group on Eritrea and Somalia admits.

The monitors, who are, in effect, tools of U.S. policy, reported that they found “no evidence” of Eritrean aid to Somali fighters over the past year, and concluded that, if such assistance exists at all, it is “negligible.” Yet, the UN Security Council, under U.S. pressure, extended the sanctions, anyway. Washington claims that Eritrea’s alleged support for the Shabab has only halted because of the sanctions, and it’s, therefore, too early to lift them – which amounts to punishing Eritrea for having the wrong intentions, whether it acts on them or not.

“In the imperial double-speak of Washington, Eritrea is described as a ‘destabilizing’ force in the region.”

It is, of course, not little Eritrea that is destabilizing the Horn of Africa, but the United States, which has made the region a front line in its so-called War on Terror. Washington's closest ally in the neighborhood is Ethiopia, from which Eritrea won its independence in 1993, after a 30-year war. The U.S. instigated, armed, financed and gave logistical support to Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia, in 2006, plunging that country into what United Nations observers called “the worst humanitarian crisis in Africa.” Under American direction, Kenya also invaded Somalia, in the midst of a great famine, last year. The U.S. bankrolls, arms and trains the nominally African Union force that occupies Somalia’s capital, and has turned neighboring Djibouti into the main base for the U.S. Africa Command, AFRICOM.

And there sits Eritrea, surrounded by warring American puppets, interfering in no one’s affairs, yet determined to defend her sovereignty – accused by the world biggest and most aggressive power of destabilizing the region.

Eritrea’s real sin is to be one of the very few nations in Africa that do not have military relations with AFRICOM, the U.S. war machine. That puts a bulls-eye on her back, along with Zimbabwe and Sudan, which U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice demanded be blockaded and bombed back in the George Bush administration. Barack Obama’s Africa policy is an extension and expansion of Bush’s aim to militarize the continent, and the much older U.S. policy to create chaos and horrific human suffering in those regions it cannot directly control. In practice, Obama’s doctrine is the same as Bush: “You are either with us or against us.”

Eritrea rejects that doctrine; that’s why it is a target. For Black Agenda Radio, I’m Glen Ford. On the web, go to BlackAgendaReport.com.

BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.



Your browser does not support the audio element.

listen
http://traffic.libsyn.com/blackagendareport/20120808_gf_Eritrea.mp3

More Stories


  • US sanctions on Russia over Ukraine also target Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba
    Benjamin Norton
    US sanctions on Russia over Ukraine also target Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba
    02 Mar 2022
    The U.S. and Western powers talk about a "Troika of Tyranny" in Latin America because the nations in that region recognize the dangers of the U.S./EU/NATO Axis of Domination. But any tyranny taking…
  • The Biden Era, Ukraine, and the Crisis of the Left w/Dr. Anthony Monteiro
    Danny Haiphong and Margaret Kimberley
    The Biden Era, Ukraine, and the Crisis of the Left w/Dr. Anthony Monteiro
    28 Feb 2022
    Danny Haiphong and Margaret Kimberley speak with Dr. Anthony Monteiro, organizer of the Saturday Free School and a long time BAR contributor.
  • New York Bail Reform Fight
    Margaret Kimberley, BAR Executive Editor and Senior Columnist
    New York Bail Reform Fight
    23 Feb 2022
    Black legislators in New York are defending their legislation which reduces the use of cash bail.
  • GLEN FORD: U.S. Prepares to Gas Russia Into Submission, March 20, 2014
    Editors, The Black Agenda Review
    GLEN FORD: U.S. Prepares to Gas Russia Into Submission, March 20, 2014
    23 Feb 2022
    Glen Ford’s prescient 2014 essay on the geopolitics of the Ukraine exposes the core issues animating the conflict: US energy interests and economic power.
  • The American Left’s China Exception: The Case of Dave Zirin
    Danny Haiphong, BAR Contributing Editor
    The American Left’s China Exception: The Case of Dave Zirin
    23 Feb 2022
    Anti-China propaganda is often spread by those who call themselves leftists but who are in fact liberal imperialists.
  • Load More
Subscribe
connect with us
about us
contact us