US to get Africa command centre

President George W Bush has approved a Pentagon plan for a command centre for Africa to oversee US military activities on the continent.


US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said the new Africa Command would allow the US to better co-ordinate action and counter potential threats.
Mr Gates said the Pentagon would consult the US Congress and others about the plans.

Africa Command would be the fifth regional operations base for the US.
Responsibility for Africa operations is currently divided among three regional commands.

It was unclear whether the new command centre would be located in Africa or the United States - along with the US Central Command, the Southern Command, and the Pacific Command.

The US also has an anti-terror task force based in Djibouti.

'Outdated arrangement'

Mr Gates was addressing the Senate Armed Services Committee on the defence spending President Bush proposed in his 2008 budget, submitted to Congress on Monday.

"This command will enable us to have a more effective and integrated approach than the current arrangement... an outdated arrangement left over from the Cold War," Mr Gates said.

He said Africa Command would "oversee security, co-operation, building partnership capability, defence support to non-military missions, and, if directed, military operations".

US officials say Africa is of growing strategic importance to the United States because of increased efforts by China to gain influence on the continent. Also, the Pentagon has voiced concern over potential threats, including terrorist threats that could emerge in war-torn areas, such as Somalia.


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/6336063.stm

Published: 2007/02/06 16:19:56 GMT

آ© BBC MMVII

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=36396

POLITICS:
Africa to Get Its Own U.S. Military Command
Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Jan 31 (IPS) - For the first time in its history, Africa is poised to get its very own U.S. military command.

The advent of "AFRICOM", which will be heralded next week when U.S. President George W. Bush submits his 2008 budget request to Congress, marks an official acknowledgement that a variety of ostensible threats in Africa require more sustained high-level attention by the Pentagon than it has been able to give until now.

Of particular concern are Africa's role in the "global war on terror," or, in Pentagon parlance, "the long war", the growing importance of the region's natural resources, especially oil and gas, to the world economy, and increased competition with China, among other countries, for those resources.

West Africa currently provides nearly 20 percent of the U.S. supply of hydrocarbons, up from 15 percent just five years ago and well on the way to a 25-percent share forecast for 2015.

Africa has been parceled out between three U.S. regional commands. The European Command (EUCOM), which covers all of Russia, the Caucasus, and Turkey, as well as the rest of Europe, also includes North Africa west of Egypt and all of West, central, and continental southern Africa.

The Central Command (CENTCOM), which covers Central Asia and the Middle East, also includes Egypt, Sudan and the Horn of Africa. Finally, the Pacific Command (PACOM) covers the African islands of the Indian Ocean, including Madagascar, as well as all of Asia and the Pacific.

Creation of AFRICOM, which will be based, initially at least, at EUCOM headquarters in Germany, has strong support from both parties in Congress.

"An Africa Command would help the U.S. military focus on a continent that is essential to our national security," according to Democrat Russell Feingold, one of the most liberal members of the Senate who also chairs its subcommittee on Africa.

"Our national security strategy needs to evolve, and so does our capability to meet new and emerging threats," he said. "An Africa Command is vital to strengthening our relations with African nations and preventing them from becoming staging grounds for attacks against the U.S. or our allies."

It is not as if the Pentagon has ignored Africa, although, since the 1993 "Blackhawk Down" incident, in which 18 U.S. servicemen were killed in Somalia, Washington has generally resisted African and international pressure to put "boots on the ground" in Africa, particularly in peacekeeping missions for which until now it has provided only logistical and financial support.

Nonetheless, Washington's military presence in the region -- especially in the Horn, in the Sahelian region, and, to a somewhat lesser extent, in oil- and gas-rich West Africa -- has grown steadily since the 9/11 attacks on New York and the Pentagon which launched the Bush administration "global war on terror."

Since 2002, the greatest concentration of U.S. military power on the continent has been based at Camp Lemonier in the former French colony of Djibouti, where between 1,500 and 1,900 CENTCOM troops have been poised for swift intervention against alleged terrorist targets elsewhere in the Horn and East Africa (where al Qaeda blew up the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam in 1998) or across the Red Sea in Yemen.

Some of those troops, as well as U.S. naval units patrolling Somalia's coast, were reportedly involved in tracking and twice attacking alleged leaders of the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) after their retreat from Mogadishu in the face of last month's Ethiopian-led offensive that ousted the group from power.

Next to Egypt, which will remain under CENTCOM's jurisdiction after the creation of the new Command, Ethiopia has been by far the largest recipient of U.S. military aid and training in Africa, and its U.S.-backed intervention in Somalia has been hailed by hawks here as a model for future counter-terror strategy.

Meanwhile, EUCOM has dispatched dozens of training units, as well as millions of dollars in weapons and other equipment, to friendly governments in the Sahelian region as part of its Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative (TSCI).

The programme, for which Congress has budgeted some 500 million dollars over the next six years, has focused on Algeria, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Nigeria, and Morocco -- all countries whose national governments have charged, with varying degrees of credibility, that al Qaeda or associated groups or individuals have been active.

Meanwhile, CENTCOM has become more active in West Africa, whose importance to future U.S. energy supplies is growing by leaps and bounds, and where poverty, corruption, and ethnic tensions, in Washington's eyes, foster the kind of instability that could result in failed states, not unlike Afghanistan or Somalia.

Africa specialists here generally support the idea of placing all of these activities, as well as others, such as U.S. support for U.N., African Union (AU), and other peacekeeping missions in the region, under one command, if for no other reason than the continent will get more sustained attention.

"I think there will be much more direct engagement, particularly with African organisations such as the AU, with a separate command, than when you have people rolling through from Europe from time to time," according to Jennifer Cooke, an expert at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies here. "For one thing, they can get a much more nuanced understanding of the problems Africa faces."

At the same time, she cautioned, "you don't want a lop-sided, security-heavy engagement in Africa, and you don't want the Defence Department setting policy. Our military engagement needs to be integrated into a much broader engagement of diplomacy, development assistance, governance, and human rights."

That concern is widely shared among Africa specialists who note that the Pentagon not only has considerably more money and other resources available to it in Africa than the State Department, but that it is also increasingly engaged in civic-action and humanitarian work that has traditionally been overseen by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and non-governmental organisations.

That worry is reportedly anticipated, at least to some extent, by the AFRICOM proposal, which reportedly calls for a senior State Department official to be permanently attached to the new command to help coordinate policy.

In addition, according to Victoria Holt, a peacekeeping expert at the Henry L. Stimson Centre, a think tank here, officers who have helped plan the new command, such as Gen. William "Kip" Ward -- who has been tipped as its likely first commander -- are aware of the military's limitations.

"There are some sophisticated military thinkers who know that it's not just guns," she told IPS. "They've spent enough time in Africa to understand some of the fundamental challenges, such as peacekeeping and governance. They could be advocates for a stronger civilian role, and their voice is one that brings with it a great deal of clout and capacity."

"If we don't have a countervailing civilian presence, we risk sending the signal that our engagement with Africa is primarily military, and that's not a signal we want to send."

Moreover, she added, "if we wrap our arms around a particular leader who's cooperative on the security front, but has a very poor record on governance and human rights, then we're likely to create problems over the long term, as we often did during the Cold War." (END/2007)

E_C,


Are you highlighting these points, and if so, what is the point(s) you are trying to make!!?

**** BUSH................

Sultan,

I just thought that I would highlight points that I found interesting. I was at a loss at understanding the significance of a reorganization - but the points that I highlighted tend to indicated that:
1. It would imply greater U.S. military coherence in Africa. This would mean that there would be greater ability to coordinate with and support continental and regional peace-keeping and anti-terrorist initiiatives.
2. It would augment the role of the Pentagon in African affairs. After all, there will be one unified command center reporting to the Pentagon on African affairs. So, if the top commander wants something done in Africa (all things equal), his voice will carry more weight in the Department of Defense than today. Moreover, it would further the Pentagon's influence in U.S. policy in Africa.

The other bolded stuff was just peripheral.

I'm surprised this thread didn't attract much posting

Sultan,

I just thought that I would highlight points that I found interesting. I was at a loss at understanding the significance of a reorganization - but the points that I highlighted tend to indicated that:

1. It would imply greater U.S. military coherence in Africa. This would mean that there would be greater ability to coordinate with and support continental and regional peace-keeping and anti-terrorist initiiatives.

2. It would augment the role of the Pentagon in African affairs. After all, there will be one unified command center reporting to the Pentagon on African affairs. So, if the top commander wants something done in Africa (all things equal), his voice will carry more weight in the Department of Defense than today. Moreover, it would further the Pentagon's influence in U.S. policy in Africa.

The other bolded stuff was just peripheral.

E_C,

So, I take it you view this as another positive step for African Countries??

I really think you are the rarest sudanese amongst all Sultan:oops :love:


Happy valentines!!!

E_C,

So, I take it you view this as another positive step for African Countries??

Absolutely Sultan. One of Africa's greatest threats is marginalization. This policy implies greater U.S. engagement with Africa. Ofcourse there are many who hold ideologies threatening to U.S. interests that will not be happy with this action. I, for one, don't feel threatened by greater U.S. engagement.

Rgds,

:jump:

:geek:

I really think you are the rarest sudanese amongst all Sultan:oops :love:


Happy valentines!!!


Misteer,

I am not sure what I have done to deserve all of this kindness, but thak you and happy Valentines to you too!!

Absolutely Sultan. One of Africa's greatest threats is marginalization. This policy implies greater U.S. engagement with Africa. Ofcourse there are many who hold ideologies threatening to U.S. interests that will not be happy with this action. I, for one, don't feel threatened by greater U.S. engagement.

Rgds,

:jump:

:geek:


E_C,

Africa’s marginalization does not stem from the lack of US military presence – as you know there are plenty of armies and despots being propped by the US in the continent. Africa’s marginalization s stems from its place in the world economy and the US is not about to do much about that beyond improve its hand vis-أ -vis the extractive industries and prosecute an incoherent policy it calls the war on terror.

However, I find it bizarre and extremely disappointing that a graduate student of International Relations, no less, with interests in Africa can view US Foreign Policy in such surreal and benign terms.

I would be threatened by any US adventures in Africa because as far the can see it has always been about US interests rather than our own. It is has been policy with little focus democracy, development, the environment, and mutual respect.

Misteer,

I am not sure what I have done to deserve all of this kindness, but thak you and happy Valentines to you too!!

Weather PPl agree or disagree Mr.Sultan but for me your posts and replies bring great educational and understanding of what goes on our home and the continent. Yes informations are every where but your distinctive views matters to us. Well atleast to me:)

And i promise i won't harass you no more:oops

US to get Africa command centre

President George W Bush has approved a Pentagon plan for a command centre for Africa to oversee US military activities on the continent.

Good news for Africa and bad news to the terrorists who see Africa as a weak land for their terrorism training.

Weather PPl agree or disagree Mr.Sultan but for me your posts and replies bring great educational and understanding of what goes on our home and the continent. Yes informations are every where but your distinctive views matters to us. Well atleast to me:)

And i promise i won't harass you no more:oops



Ya Misteer,

Like I said I am grateful for your very kind words. However, for the record I said nothing about being harassed! :lool:

TGG,

Nelson Mandela was once considered a terrorist by Dick Chaney and some in the the US Congress (they even voted on it) when they were all in bed with Apartheid South Africa– the moral of the story, aside from your infantile mental farts, some issues are better considered on their own merit rather than as reaction to those you hate!

:lool: sorry it felt like that for me,ma face is really burning now.:oops

i really am not having a good day today and thanks for picking out my:roll: and made me laugh:)

take care

TGG,

Nelson Mandela was once considered a terrorist by Dick Chaney and some in the the US Congress (they even voted on it) when they were all in bed with Apartheid South Africa– the moral of the story, aside from your infantile mental farts, some issues are better considered on their own merit rather than as reaction to those you hate!

Sultan, Can you restrain from insulting?

It's not a secret that there are many terrorists elements in Africa, specially in those country that have more muslims population.

As you know in Europe, North America and Latin America to be a muslims is = terrorists. What I mean is that Africa is the only contenent that muslims still have some credibility. And you have to preserve that by not protecting terrorism, otherwise, Africans will see you as terrorists.

Misteer,

No harm done I hope!

You take it easy now!!








Sultan, Can you restrain from insulting?It's not a secret that there are many terrorists elements in Africa, specially in those country that have more muslims population.As you know in Europe, North America and Latin America to be a muslims is = terrorists. What I mean is that Africa is the only contenent that muslims still have some credibility. And you have to preserve that by not protecting terrorism, otherwise, Africans will see you as terrorists.

TGG,

Only if you respond in good faith – not every post can have the same idiotic answer!!

FYI:

The US has the following geographic military Commands

Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) - North America
Pacific Command (USPACOM) - Pacific + India
Central Command (USCENTCOM) – Egypt and Arab countries to the east, Sudan & Horn of Africa, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan
European Command (USEUCOM) - Europe & FSU and the rest of Africa
Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) – Caribbean and Latin America

It also has 4 other commands with the following Functional Responsibilities:

Special Operations Command (USSOCOM)
Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM)
Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM)
Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM)


http://www.cdi.org/issues/USForces/commands.html

no harm done,it was just one of those when things don't go my way and it seems like it is minus fifty with the wind out here:tears: . but, oh well, life goes on:)

Africa will be the next battlefield between teh Chinese and teh Americans (politically and economically). The first World War was fought in Europe and the far east, the Cold War was between western Europe and eastern Europe. The third one (cold or hot) is going to be fought on Africa soil. What is next? Africa is going to be divided between the pro-Chinese and pro-Americans. That is what I can see.

Deekuei! You could be right!

E_C,

Africa’s marginalization does not stem from the lack of US military presence – as you know there are plenty of armies and despots being propped by the US in the continent. Africa’s marginalization s stems from its place in the world economy and the US is not about to do much about that beyond improve its hand vis-أ -vis the extractive industries and prosecute an incoherent policy it calls the war on terror.



Sultan,

Any emergence in Africa will have to be derived by internal agents. It is, however, important to note that Africa due to its ethno-linguistic fractionalization, geography, leadership, colonial history etc. is extremely vulnerable. In that regard, U.S. leadership and involvement in creating an enabling environment for development is key. By itself, however, it will not imply that any African development will inevitably follow.

I don't expect the U.S. to go beyond its interests (i.e. bend over backwards) to get Africa to develop. U.S. commitment and action is best done when its direct interests are at stake. In other words, you have to understand U.S. policy to appreciate how best to allign U.S. interests with that of yours. The Israeli lobby has been great at that.

In so doing, however, it is important to temper your expectations. I don't expect the U.S. to go out of its way to institute a liberal democracy in Ethiopia - bearing all the costs and benefits that such an action might entail, as it has attempted to do in Iraq. Ethiopia's democratic process will simply have to unveil itself - but in so doing, it is important to seek ways of alligning U.S. and Ethiopian interests.

One example is Germany under Wilhelm's incapacity to understand why Britain, which was pursuing an offshore-balance strategy in continental Europe, didn't entertain any attempts by Wilhelm at creating a German-British alliance that would upset Continental Europe's balance of power. Wilhelm was left very frustrated by Britain as he just couldn't understand why Britain continued to shun any of his entreaties.

contd/..

However, I find it bizarre and extremely disappointing that a graduate student of International Relations, no less, with interests in Africa can view US Foreign Policy in such surreal and benign terms.


Sultan, the useful thing to know about U.S. policy is that in most cases it is rational. It has a logic. Most importantly, it is subject to change. What I find no less 'bizarre' is your presumption that the U.S. is actually subverting Africa's development. Africa's predatory and incompetent authoritarian leaders have set Africa on its downward spiral. The more recent benevolent authoritarian leaders of East Asia have been able to wade through the minefield of recent cold-war politics, and established tiger economies.


I would be threatened by any US adventures in Africa because as far the can see it has always been about US interests rather than our own. It is has been policy with little focus democracy, development, the environment, and mutual respect.

International Relations 101- 'States pursue their own interests.' Get over it! Better still constructively deal with it!

Hi E-C:)


but darn it!!! E-C:lool: it is really that obvious:lool: :tears: :lool: :roll:

E_C,

I donأ½ have any difficulty reading US Foreign Policy and Military posture – the US, like any grand power, has imperial pretensions and aspirations.

What I am having difficulty with is the point you are trying to make!?

It seems to me you are going circles trying to do some sort of soft sell - of what exactly - I am not sure. I gave you four areas where the US has no interest vis-أ -vis Africa and these happen to be precisely the areas that need to see progress to eventually put an end to the squalor in which most Africans live.


I mean the obvious and normal expectation is for Africans to look at this development in very ominous terms!! After all this is not family-planning nor technological transfer or non-GM food donations. The likely outcome of this is mayhem that is likely to consume African lives.

If you can demonstrably explain your glee for this type of US interest in Africa and how that will benefit ordinary Africans – then perhaps we can have a more constructive exchange.

For the US, any policy it assumes, at any time, will look rational and logical. However, the soundness of any political posture can only be analyzed over a continuum, e.g., three years into Iraq it is safe to conclude that the policy is an unmitigated disaster. So is the “New breed of African Leaders.â€‌

The US first came to post-colonial Africa to fight the Cold War – I can’t just assume consequences of its policies away, particularly for my country and the neighborhood that is in.

At the end of the day, we should not be propagating policies that we have no input nor the polices that ignore our real interests – it this that makes me dubious of more US military interest in Africa – because when the bombs come falling they will fall on our heads.

So, tell me again why you think a US military Command for Africa is something we should be gleeful over compared to other less threatening and more socially redeemable engagement?

Sultan - I just cut and paste what I had written earlier.

Sultan,

I just thought that I would highlight points that I found interesting. I was at a loss at understanding the significance of a reorganization - but the points that I highlighted tend to indicated that:
1. It would imply greater U.S. military coherence in Africa. This would mean that there would be greater ability to coordinate with and support continental and regional peace-keeping and anti-terrorist initiiatives.
2. It would augment the role of the Pentagon in African affairs. After all, there will be one unified command center reporting to the Pentagon on African affairs. So, if the top commander wants something done in Africa (all things equal), his voice will carry more weight in the Department of Defense than today. Moreover, it would further the Pentagon's influence in U.S. policy in Africa.

The other bolded stuff was just peripheral.



1. It would imply greater U.S. military coherence in Africa. This would mean that there would be greater ability to coordinate with and support continental and regional peace-keeping and anti-terrorist initiiatives.

This would mean that African initiatives at bringing peace will be facilitated by such a move. Consequently, there will be greater confidence and ability in the capacities of the AU and other regional organizations to muster needed muscle to pursue peace building. As a note I read an article a while back stating that the U.S. plans to designate a separate U.S. Ambassador for the A.U. (Therefore, there will be two U.S. Ambassadors in Ethiopia). This highlights the increased importance of Africa's continental/regional organizations to U.S. policy.

http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=August&x=20060808143810WCyeroC0.3668482

08 August 2006
United States To Establish Mission to African Union

Move reflects U.S. commitment to the region, U.S. diplomat says
By Charles W. Corey
Washington File Staff Writer


http://photos.state.gov/libraries/475/08b06/080806-cindycourville-200.jpg Dr. Cindy L. Courville has been nominated to be the U.S. Ambassador-designate to the African Union (AU). (State Dept. photo)


Washington -- The United States will be the first non-African country to establish a separate diplomatic mission to the African Union (AU), and that reflects the U.S. government's commitment to the organization, said Cindy L. Courville, the U.S. ambassador-designate to the AU.

In August 3 testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Courville quoted President Bush with regard to Africa: "'Africa holds growing geostrategic importance and is a high priority of this administration. It is a place of promise and opportunity, linked to the United States by history, culture, commerce and strategic significance. Our goal is an African continent that knows liberty, peace, stability and increasing prosperity.'"
If confirmed, Courville said those core convictions will guide her actions. The U.S. Senate must approve her nomination to head the new U.S. mission in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, headquarters of the AU.

To overcome the challenges on the continent, Courville said, the United States believes Africa needs partnership, not paternalism; stronger democratic institutions; economic development through greater trade and investment; an atmosphere of peace and stability; and humanitarian assistance that promotes good health.

Courville called democracy, transparency and good governance the "fundamental" parts of a freer Africa.
Freedom is a privilege and a right that all people should have the opportunity to experience, she said, adding that democracy has advanced in more African countries in the last decade than in any other region of the world.
Courville praised the AU as a "force multiplier" for the consolidation of democracy in Africa. "It has pushed its members to increase women's participation and representation as parliamentarians and Cabinet ministers. A democratic, peaceful, stable and economically strong Africa is mutually beneficial to both Africa and the United States," she said.
Additionally, she said, the United States seeks to advance economic development across Africa through greater trade and investment there. She credited the AU for building its economic policy framework on the principles outlined in the New Partnership for Africa's Development, or NEPAD. That program, she told the lawmakers, underscores that Africans must take responsibility for their own development and adopt the economic policies required to attract investment and create jobs. (See related article (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=July&x=20060718131436wcyeroc0.3791925).)
Courville pledged that, if confirmed, she will work with the African Union in harmony with the U.S. African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) to increase Africa's trade competitiveness and its integration into the global economy, especially by helping the AU reduce intra-African trade barriers and strengthen subregional economic communities such as the East African Community (EAC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA). (See related article (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=June&x=20060612142552WCyeroC0.4297296).)
Besides increased trade, peace and stability are also essential to a successful Africa, she said.
For that reason, she said, the United States must work with its African partners to build regional peacekeeping capacity, increase counterterrorism cooperation and enhance disaster mitigation and response capability. She reminded everyone that the United States has supported the AU's two major peacekeeping deployments in Burundi and Sudan.
Courville also called attention to the African Contingency Operations Training and Assistance (ACOTA) program, which she called a "fundamental tool" for increasing the capacity of Africa's subregional organizations. The ACOTA program is increasing the number of countries in which training takes place and has provided training and equipment to more than 40,000 peacekeepers from African partner militaries, she said.

She also cited the Africa Center for Strategic Studies program as a critical tool for strengthening African regional capacity to address political-military issues at a strategic level, improve national security decision-making and strengthen civil-military relationships. (See related article (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=August&x=200608011600502jrgnik0.5310633).)

America's search is not only for a more secure Africa, but also for a healthier Africa, she said. She credited the AU for working to eliminate the scourges of malaria, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS on the continent.
The United States contributes nearly half of the resources provided by all donor governments to fight global HIV/AIDS, she said, citing the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a five-year, $15 billion initiative to turn the tide in combating HIV/AIDS pandemic in 15 focus countries, 12 of which are located in sub-Saharan Africa. (See President Bush’s HIV/AIDS Initiatives (http://usinfo.state.gov/gi/global_issues/HIV_AIDS/hiv_aids_initiative.html).)
The United States also stands as the largest bilateral donor to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, providing $600 million between 2001 and 2003, she added.
Courville noted that in June 2005, President Bush launched the Malaria Initiative with the goal of reducing malaria-related deaths by 50 percent in targeted African countries. She pledged that, if confirmed, she will continue to work with the AU to help it achieve a healthier Africa.
(The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
PAGE TOOLS



More Coverage

Bush Names U.S. Representative to African Union (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=July&x=20060712185115nainawhdaw0.8008692)
U.S. Official Praises African Union's Counterterrorism Efforts (http://usinfo.state.gov/af/Archive/2006/Mar/03-70981.html)
U.S. Praises African Union's Support for U.N. Operation in Darfur (http://usinfo.state.gov/af/Archive/2006/Mar/13-930098.html)

She is already the Ambassador to the AU

http://addisababa.usembassy.gov/pr5006.html

U.S. Ambassador to the African Union, Cindy L. Courville, Presents Copy of Her Credentials to African Union Chairperson Alpha O. Konare
December 22, 2006

No. 50/06
Addis Ababa (U.S. Embassy) -- The newly appointed United States Ambassador to the African Union, Cindy L. Courville, presented a copy of her credentials to African Union Chairperson Alpha O. Konare on the morning of Friday December 22.
Ambassador Courville, formerly Special Assistant to U.S. President George W. Bush and Senior Director for Africa at the National Security Council, is a noted African expert, who has three decades of experience in research, study and involvement in African life and government.
Ambassador Courville, the first Ambassador from a non-African country accredited solely to the African Union, told AU Chairperson Konare that her appointment comes at an historic moment for Africa and the United States.
The African Union has now established itself as a robust successor to the Organization of African Unity, with its Commission embarking on initiatives to improve the health, safety, security, livelihood and freedom of the peoples of Africa. She likened the emergence of the African Union on the world stage as akin to that of the transformation of the League of Nations into the United Nations.
Ambassador Courville told Chairperson Konare that the United States wants to be a full partner with the African Union and looks forward to working with the member nations.
####

Sultan - I just cut and paste what I had written earlier.




1. It would imply greater U.S. military coherence in Africa. This would mean that there would be greater ability to coordinate with and support continental and regional peace-keeping and anti-terrorist initiiatives.

This would mean that African initiatives at bringing peace will be facilitated by such a move. Consequently, there will be greater confidence and ability in the capacities of the AU and other regional organizations to muster needed muscle to pursue peace building. As a note I read an article a while back stating that the U.S. plans to designate a separate U.S. Ambassador for the A.U. (Therefore, there will be two U.S. Ambassadors in Ethiopia). This highlights the increased importance of Africa's continental/regional organizations to U.S. policy.

E_C,

You just finished telling me that the US ought to and should look after #1 I assumed this universal truth to apply equally well to Africa!

What do we in Africa, as ordinary citizens, hope to get?

Greater military coherence is not function of geography, but rather threats. The US, depending on its own opaque and often contrived definition of a threat, i.e., not getting its way, faces two sorts of threats one relates to the Islamists threat, which is not African but global, diffused and I would say has no conventional military solution as Iraq/Afghanistan have clearly illustrated. The other relates to its posture/access/desire vis-أ -vis Africa’s hydrocarbon and mineral resources.

The first threat as I said is not unique to Africa, but in the pursuit it has been supporting regimes in Sudanic Africa with military and technical advisers Algiers, Morocco, Mali, Senegal, Chad were some of these countries that were offered and received specific military packages. In the great lakes there was the ruse of training African troops for peace-keeping and one of the recipients just illustrated its training by invading Somalia in coordination with US military help.

The resource problem is rather challenging because it can’tأ½ be fixed satisfactorily without addressing a good portion of what I outlined for an African agenda – Nigeria is the most threatening by virtue of its resource base, actual role, and size. The Congo is next. Algeria is being contained, Libya subdued, and Angola the same.

Peace keeping – should that be provided through the US or the International community. Has the US changed its mind about boots on the ground in Africa, the issue of command, and legal waivers for its troops against prosecution!?

The question is not whether the US has a greater focus on Africa, but rather is the focus beneficial to African countries and their people rather than their despots?

Ps: The last time US troops came in force (F-15s and AWACS planes…etc) our biggest threat was sitting in the Republican Palace – his name was Nemairy they came at his invitation.

E_C,

You just finished telling me that the US ought to and should look after #1 I assumed this universal truth to apply equally well to Africa!

What do we in Africa, as ordinary citizens, hope to get?

Greater military coherence is not function of geography, but rather threats. The US, depending on its own opaque and often contrived definition of a threat, i.e., not getting its way, faces two sorts of threats one relates to the Islamists threat, which is not African but global, diffused and I would say has no conventional military solution as Iraq/Afghanistan have clearly illustrated. The other relates to its posture/access/desire vis-أ -vis Africa’s hydrocarbon and mineral resources.

The first threat as I said is not unique to Africa, but in the pursuit it has been supporting regimes in Sudanic Africa with military and technical advisers Algiers, Morocco, Mali, Senegal, Chad were some of these countries that were offered and received specific military packages. In the great lakes there was the ruse of training African troops for peace-keeping and one of the recipients just illustrated its training by invading Somalia in coordination with US military help.

The resource problem is rather challenging because it can’tأ½ be fixed satisfactorily without addressing a good portion of what I outlined for an African agenda – Nigeria is the most threatening by virtue of its resource base, actual role, and size. The Congo is next. Algeria is being contained, Libya subdued, and Angola the same.

Peace keeping – should that be provided through the US or the International community. Has the US changed its mind about boots on the ground in Africa, the issue of command, and legal waivers for its troops against prosecution!?

The question is not whether the US has a greater focus on Africa, but rather is the focus beneficial to African countries and their people rather than their despots?

Ps: The last time US troops came in force (F-15s and AWACS planes…etc) our biggest threat was sitting in the Republican Palace – his name was Nemairy they came at his invitation.


Great post Sultan. Let me sit and deliberate on this post for some time and then reply. Student life is absorbing as I am sure you are very well aware.

Best regards,

E-c :) ,it is obvious of what you are trying to sale or trying so hard to shove on others. Not all of Africa is a Golden Child of mamamerica:roll:

And this saying holds a great deal with your ET:lool: "Dont bite the hands that feeds ya":lool:

It is really a pitty that a person of your calibor(with your education) could be this pethatic, particularly of your Oromia been mostly of Islam faith and welcome this bs.

gall mamamerica can not bend over of all of Africa needs gall:lool:

bastardo:lool: ya i said it bastardo....and i dare you to pull the tillian...shitz on me now by calling you a bastardo:lool:

i personally don't think the U.S command center will bring anything positive to the african continent.

I am surprised that some people praise American expasionist policy!
The US has been searching for ways to get a full copyright of the resources of the whole world. Africa was a secret gold mine in the mind of American corporates, this truth start fading with the increasing presence of hungry Chinese industry. As my friend Deekuei visualized it the third world war is yes to be fought in Africa!
We should expect more surprising anouncement of new_neocolonialization of Africa!

Africa will be the next battlefield between teh Chinese and teh Americans (politically and economically). The first World War was fought in Europe and the far east, the Cold War was between western Europe and eastern Europe. The third one (cold or hot) is going to be fought on Africa soil. What is next? Africa is going to be divided between the pro-Chinese and pro-Americans. That is what I can see.

I totally agree with your point here and is already started in our own back yard; when Al bashir invited chines President and gave him public welcome that never seen by any head of head is a indication Sudan is already on China side.

I am surprised that some people praise American expasionist policy!

Just :lool: :lool: :lool: and nothing more!

I totally agree with your point here and is already started in our own back yard; when Al bashir invited chines President and gave him public welcome that never seen by any head of head is a indication Sudan is already on China side.

why go that far with our lard a.ss leaders of Africa while we have a civilian like our bro E-C doing exactly what he despise of what his own leaders do. turnning around and doing the same thing:evil:.He must have a self interest or something.:roll: :mad:

I am surprised that some people praise American expasionist policy!
The US has been searching for ways to get a full copyright of the resources of the whole world. Africa was a secret gold mine in the mind of American corporates, this truth start fading with the increasing presence of hungry Chinese industry. As my friend Deekuei visualized it the third world war is yes to be fought in Africa!
We should expect more surprising anouncement of new_neocolonialization of Africa!


Absolutely right, Akew. China and the west are different bustardz with the same azzhulأ«s' agendas which are destructive to Africans.

Absolutely right, Akew. China and the west are different bustardz with the same azzhulأ«s' agendas which are destructive to Africans.

Deekuei:

Africans share a lot of the blame. Whenever you see young Africans failing to maximize their educational & personal advancement - you see the root of Africa's vulnerability. Benjamin Friedman in his book the moral consequences of economic growth - succinctly describes the essence of Japan (East Asia's miracle) on their emphasis on education and saving. What is the greatest crime isn't that people take advantage of someone, but that that person(society) contributes to his/her(their) own vulnerability - by squandering opportunities.

I totally agree with your point here and is already started in our own back yard; when Al bashir invited chines President and gave him public welcome that never seen by any head of head is a indication Sudan is already on China side.

Curious one:

China and the U.S. aren't really Africa's enemies - nor are they their own enemies. They are vociferous competitors, but also increasingly mutually dependent. China's glut for resources is what is pushing Africa's commodity prices to the roof. Without China (and India) not many of Africa's mineral resoures wouldn't be fetching in terms of price. What is important is whether Africa can emerge from its reliance on the supply of unprocessed/raw primary resources and compete effectively and efficiently in more value-added sectors. That requires a degree of sophistication that hasn't been seen in Africa in a very long time. Whether Africans can pass that bar - will be a product of their own decisions?

Cheers!

why go that far with our lard a.ss leaders of Africa while we have a civilian like our bro E-C doing exactly what he despise of what his own leaders do. turnning around and doing the same thing:evil:.He must have a self interest or something.:roll: :mad:

Anchi kiliflif! :mad:

Curious one:

China and the U.S. aren't really Africa's enemies - nor are they their own enemies. They are vociferous competitors, but also increasingly mutually dependent. China's glut for resources is what is pushing Africa's commodity prices to the roof. Without China (and India) not many of Africa's mineral resoures wouldn't be fetching in terms of price. What is important is whether Africa can emerge from its reliance on the supply of unprocessed/raw primary resources and compete effectively and efficiently in more value-added sectors. That requires a degree of sophistication that hasn't been seen in Africa in a very long time. Whether Africans can pass that bar - will be a product of their own decisions?

Cheers!
They are not enemies only if China does not want to be a world supper power; however, if there is a small though from China in that road, than they will become enemies and Africa will become a battle ground; the question is: whether is war or a competition will Africa benefit from it? One direction Africa will loose other direction Africa will gain.

http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=August&x=20060808143810WCyeroC0.3668482

08 August 2006
United States To Establish Mission to African Union

Move reflects U.S. commitment to the region, U.S. diplomat says
By Charles W. Corey
Washington File Staff Writer


http://photos.state.gov/libraries/475/08b06/080806-cindycourville-200.jpg Dr. Cindy L. Courville has been nominated to be the U.S. Ambassador-designate to the African Union (AU). (State Dept. photo)


Washington -- The United States will be the first non-African country to establish a separate diplomatic mission to the African Union (AU), and that reflects the U.S. government's commitment to the organization, said Cindy L. Courville, the U.S. ambassador-designate to the AU.

In August 3 testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Courville quoted President Bush with regard to Africa: "'Africa holds growing geostrategic importance and is a high priority of this administration. It is a place of promise and opportunity, linked to the United States by history, culture, commerce and strategic significance. Our goal is an African continent that knows liberty, peace, stability and increasing prosperity.'"
If confirmed, Courville said those core convictions will guide her actions. The U.S. Senate must approve her nomination to head the new U.S. mission in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, headquarters of the AU.

To overcome the challenges on the continent, Courville said, the United States believes Africa needs partnership, not paternalism; stronger democratic institutions; economic development through greater trade and investment; an atmosphere of peace and stability; and humanitarian assistance that promotes good health.

Courville called democracy, transparency and good governance the "fundamental" parts of a freer Africa.
Freedom is a privilege and a right that all people should have the opportunity to experience, she said, adding that democracy has advanced in more African countries in the last decade than in any other region of the world.
Courville praised the AU as a "force multiplier" for the consolidation of democracy in Africa. "It has pushed its members to increase women's participation and representation as parliamentarians and Cabinet ministers. A democratic, peaceful, stable and economically strong Africa is mutually beneficial to both Africa and the United States," she said.
Additionally, she said, the United States seeks to advance economic development across Africa through greater trade and investment there. She credited the AU for building its economic policy framework on the principles outlined in the New Partnership for Africa's Development, or NEPAD. That program, she told the lawmakers, underscores that Africans must take responsibility for their own development and adopt the economic policies required to attract investment and create jobs. (See related article (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=July&x=20060718131436wcyeroc0.3791925).)
Courville pledged that, if confirmed, she will work with the African Union in harmony with the U.S. African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) to increase Africa's trade competitiveness and its integration into the global economy, especially by helping the AU reduce intra-African trade barriers and strengthen subregional economic communities such as the East African Community (EAC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA). (See related article (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=June&x=20060612142552WCyeroC0.4297296).)
Besides increased trade, peace and stability are also essential to a successful Africa, she said.
For that reason, she said, the United States must work with its African partners to build regional peacekeeping capacity, increase counterterrorism cooperation and enhance disaster mitigation and response capability. She reminded everyone that the United States has supported the AU's two major peacekeeping deployments in Burundi and Sudan.
Courville also called attention to the African Contingency Operations Training and Assistance (ACOTA) program, which she called a "fundamental tool" for increasing the capacity of Africa's subregional organizations. The ACOTA program is increasing the number of countries in which training takes place and has provided training and equipment to more than 40,000 peacekeepers from African partner militaries, she said.

She also cited the Africa Center for Strategic Studies program as a critical tool for strengthening African regional capacity to address political-military issues at a strategic level, improve national security decision-making and strengthen civil-military relationships. (See related article (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=August&x=200608011600502jrgnik0.5310633).)

America's search is not only for a more secure Africa, but also for a healthier Africa, she said. She credited the AU for working to eliminate the scourges of malaria, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS on the continent.
The United States contributes nearly half of the resources provided by all donor governments to fight global HIV/AIDS, she said, citing the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a five-year, $15 billion initiative to turn the tide in combating HIV/AIDS pandemic in 15 focus countries, 12 of which are located in sub-Saharan Africa. (See President Bush’s HIV/AIDS Initiatives (http://usinfo.state.gov/gi/global_issues/HIV_AIDS/hiv_aids_initiative.html).)
The United States also stands as the largest bilateral donor to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, providing $600 million between 2001 and 2003, she added.
Courville noted that in June 2005, President Bush launched the Malaria Initiative with the goal of reducing malaria-related deaths by 50 percent in targeted African countries. She pledged that, if confirmed, she will continue to work with the AU to help it achieve a healthier Africa.
(The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
PAGE TOOLS

More Coverage

Bush Names U.S. Representative to African Union (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=July&x=20060712185115nainawhdaw0.8008692)
U.S. Official Praises African Union's Counterterrorism Efforts (http://usinfo.state.gov/af/Archive/2006/Mar/03-70981.html)
U.S. Praises African Union's Support for U.N. Operation in Darfur (http://usinfo.state.gov/af/Archive/2006/Mar/13-930098.html)

Ethio-!!!
I know this is 'off point', but i talked to Tigist a few days ago and she sounded more like Sultan than you on that '...Opportunities For Democracy ....Ethiopia...', and she's not even communist!.
Quite the opposite in fact.:confused:

Anchi kiliflif! :mad:

:p yene konjo, lemn kornofnof, ha'ke aydlemn:-?

besmam ble esk,Africa ET trah aymeslen

meslen ke'sebe meten asfhka mhsab true now:)

btw, the only ekreta you will get is for calling you that B word:lool: and that is in blocking it a head of time because i am tired of hearing it all the time by ETees for no other reason but thier arragonce:mad: and ignorance:D

sultan,
this time i totally agree with you.
and the comments made by that monkey called e-c is really amazing,how old is he or she ?

what matters is economy not military.

E_C,

Africa’s marginalization does not stem from the lack of US military presence – as you know there are plenty of armies and despots being propped by the US in the continent. Africa’s marginalization s stems from its place in the world economy and the US is not about to do much about that beyond improve its hand vis-أ -vis the extractive industries and prosecute an incoherent policy it calls the war on terror.

However, I find it bizarre and extremely disappointing that a graduate student of International Relations, no less, with interests in Africa can view US Foreign Policy in such surreal and benign terms.

I would be threatened by any US adventures in Africa because as far the can see it has always been about US interests rather than our own. It is has been policy with little focus democracy, development, the environment, and mutual respect.

:p yene konjo, lemn kornofnof, ha'ke aydlemn:-?

besmam ble esk,Africa ET trah aymeslen

meslen ke'sebe meten asfhka mhsab true now:)

btw, the only ekreta you will get is for calling you that B word:lool: and that is in blocking it a head of time because i am tired of hearing it all the time by ETees for no other reason but thier arragonce:mad: and ignorance:D

I am awaiting another apology for calling me 'pathetic'. With respect to ETees, I don't know which ones you hang around with. The ones I know are self-confident and intelligent :wink: But for the 'bastardo' apology you get a :clap:
:) :)

:lool: I am awaiting another apology for calling me 'pathetic'. With respect to ETees, I don't know which ones you hang around with. The ones I know are self-confident and intelligent :wink: But for the 'bastardo' apology you get a :clap:
:) :)

:lool: :lool: :lool: @ETees,well that was the creative part of me:p :lool: i guess

hehehe... the pathetic part was for your selfishness,typical of you ET:wink:

I am sure you as an ET can't speak for all of them can you ?:wink:

and please don't you even dare me on that one,confidence:lool: hey,i did bring you to your knees didn't I typical of me Eritrean jignawit:wink: :lool:

E-C:) really, you are very konjo, i hardly even speak your lingo but i've tried and it never failed me:wink:

Thanks for the :clap:

Ethio-!!!
I know this is 'off point', but i talked to Tigist a few days ago and she sounded more like Sultan than you on that '...Opportunities For Democracy ....Ethiopia...', and she's not even communist!.
Quite the opposite in fact.:confused:

Tigist might be right - it depends on how you read things. I am focusing on the fragile pillars of the regime and the global winds of change. She might be focusing on the repressive acts of late. One thing that I can tell you is even with any changes at the top - the struggle for the subserviance of the state to the populace continues. 'Fat cat Government officials' will be made to realize that at the end of the day they are public servants. I call that disciplining Ethiopia's public service and it starts right from the top and extends to the officials at the front-line. Anyway Zozimos - take care and best of luck.

Tigist might be right - it depends on how you read things. I am focusing on the fragile pillars of the regime and the global winds of change. She might be focusing on the repressive acts of late. One thing that I can tell you is even with any changes at the top - the struggle for the subserviance of the state to the populace continues. 'Fat cat Government officials' will be made to realize that at the end of the day they are public servants. I call that disciplining Ethiopia's public service and it starts right from the top and extends to the officials at the front-line. Anyway Zozimos - take care and best of luck.

way to go Tigi:)

Deekuei:

Africans share a lot of the blame. Whenever you see young Africans failing to maximize their educational & personal advancement - you see the root of Africa's vulnerability. Benjamin Friedman in his book the moral consequences of economic growth - succinctly describes the essence of Japan (East Asia's miracle) on their emphasis on education and saving. What is the greatest crime isn't that people take advantage of someone, but that that person(society) contributes to his/her(their) own vulnerability - by squandering opportunities.

Absolutely true. Example is Mugabe whose misguided hatred for white zims landed the economy of Zimbabwe in the hands of Chinese. To add something to what you already said, African politicians are good for nothing. Unless they stop their nothingism atitudes, Africa will witness another 50 years of exploitation and possible elimination of black Africans by the Chinese.

I see our fate as similar to that of the native Americans, but unlike the natives of the Americas who were exterminated by force, Chinese are using different strategy, that is, economic and political cooperation with the continent of Africa which is helping them to settle their workers who are now coming in tens of thousands every year. In this context, unlike westerners who came to Africa for raw materials and slaves, Chinese are coming to stay believe it or not.

These are the indications: the roads, the dams, the loans, and factories that are being built in various countries in Africa today by the Chinese are just preparatory facilities meant to prepare the way for Chinese immigrants. There are roughly 40-60 thousands Chinese in the Sudan today and that number may rich 1-3 million in 5 years. The same applies to the rest of the African countries. As aids, poverty, treatable diseases, and negligence continue to degrade Africans, the bottomline is that, China wants to fill the gap by settling its excess population in Africa and this process will take roughly 10-20 years.

Absolutely true. Example is Mugabe whose misguided hatred for white zims landed the economy of Zimbabwe in the hands of Chinese. To add something to what you already said, African politicians are good for nothing. Unless they stop their nothingism atitudes, Africa will witness another 50 years of exploitation and possible elimination of black Africans by the Chinese.

I see our fate as similar to that of the native Americans, but unlike the natives of the Americas who were exterminated by force, Chinese are using different strategy, that is, economic and political cooperation with the continent of Africa which is helping them to settle their workers who are now coming in tens of thousands every year. In this context, unlike westerners who came to Africa for raw materials and slaves, Chinese are coming to stay believe it or not.

These are the indications: the roads, the dams, the loans, and factories that are being built in various countries in Africa today by the Chinese are just preparatory facilities meant to prepare the way for Chinese immigrants. There are roughly 40-60 thousands Chinese in the Sudan today and that number may rich 1-3 million in 5 years. The same applies to the rest of the African countries. As aids, poverty, treatable diseases, and negligence continue to degrade Africans, the bottomline is that, China wants to fill the gap by settling its excess population in Africa and this process will take roughly 10-20 years.

Do we need them in south Sudan?

Do we need them in south Sudan?

I don't know at this time but the last time I checked the government of South Sudan, there were contacts to establish future relationship with Chinese government.

14 October 2011 Last updated at 17:01 ET


US to send troops to Uganda to help fight LRA rebels

US President Barack Obama has said he is sending about 100 US soldiers to Uganda to help regional forces battle the notorious Lord's Resistance Army.

Although combat-equipped, the troops would be providing information and advice "to partner nation forces", Mr Obama wrote in a letter to US Congress.

A small group is already in Uganda, and the troops could later be deployed in other central African nations.

The LRA is blamed for mass murder, rape and kidnapping in the region.

'Kill or capture'

"I have authorised a small number of combat-equipped US forces to deploy to central Africa to provide assistance to regional forces that are working toward the removal of (LRA leader) Joseph Kony from the battlefield," Mr Obama wrote on Friday.

But he stressed that "although the US forces are combat-equipped... they will not themselves engage LRA forces unless necessary for self-defence".

Mr Obama did not provide any details about the deployment duration, but a US military spokesman later told the BBC that the "forces are prepared to stay as long as necessary to enable regional security forces to carry on independently".

The force will use hi-tech equipment to assist in what analysts say is a "kill or capture" policy, the BBC's Marcus George in Washington reports.

The deployment follows recent US legislation to help disarm the LRA and bring its leader to justice. The theory is, our correspondent adds, that without Joseph Kony, the movement will collapse from within.

At least 30,000 people died as the LRA spread terror in northern Uganda for more than 20 years, displacing some two million people.

It is notorious for kidnapping children, forcing the boys to become fighters and using girls as sex slaves.

The group is listed by the US as a terrorist organisation and now operates mainly in neighbouring countries such as Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan and Central Africa Republic.

Joseph Kony and his close aides have been wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) since 2005.

He refused to sign a peace deal with the Ugandan government in 2008 when it could not guarantee the withdrawal of the ICC arrest warrants.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15317684

Full-Text-Obama’s Letter to Congress Detailing Dispatch of Troops to Central-Africa

"Dear Mr. Speaker:

For more than two decades, the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) has murdered, raped, and kidnapped tens of thousands of men, women, and children in central Africa. The LRA continues to commit atrocities across the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and South Sudan that have a disproportionate impact on regional security. Since 2008, the United States has supported regional military efforts to pursue the LRA and protect local communities. Even with some limited U.S. assistance, however, regional military efforts have thus far been unsuccessful in removing LRA leader Joseph Kony or his top commanders from the battlefield. In the Lord’s Resistance Army Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act of 2009, Public Law 111-172, enacted May 24, 2010, the Congress also expressed support for increased, comprehensive U.S. efforts to help mitigate and eliminate the threat posed by the LRA to civilians and regional stability.

In furtherance of the Congress’s stated policy, I have authorized a small number of combat-equipped U.S. forces to deploy to central Africa to provide assistance to regional forces that are working toward the removal of Joseph Kony from the battlefield. I believe that deploying these U.S. Armed Forces furthers U.S. national security interests and foreign policy and will be a significant contribution toward counter-LRA efforts in central Africa.

On October 12, the initial team of U.S. military personnel with appropriate combat equipment deployed to Uganda. During the next month, additional forces will deploy, including a second combat-equipped team and associated headquarters, communications, and logistics personnel. The total number of U.S. military personnel deploying for this mission is approximately 100. These forces will act as advisors to partner forces that have the goal of removing from the battlefield Joseph Kony and other senior leadership of the LRA. Our forces will provide information, advice, and assistance to select partner nation forces. Subject to the approval of each respective host nation, elements of these U.S. forces will deploy into Uganda, South Sudan, the Central African Republic, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The support provided by U.S. forces will enhance regional efforts against the LRA. However, although the U.S. forces are combat-equipped, they will only be providing information, advice, and assistance to partner nation forces, and they will not themselves engage LRA forces unless necessary for self-defense. All appropriate precautions have been taken to ensure the safety of U.S. military personnel during their deployment.

I have directed this deployment, which is in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States, pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct U.S. foreign relations and as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive. I am making this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148). I appreciate the support of the Congress in this action.

Sincerely,

BARACK OBAMA"


http://foxnewsinsider.com/2011/10/14/full-text-obamas-letter-to-congress-detailing-dispatch-of-troops-to-central-africa/

............

Comment: There .. that did not take long at all!!

:lool::lool::lool:


Wait you had, Gold, oil, a great location, a diverse population etc etc! But, you decided you wanted a KILLER to institute an Islamic state!!! Now you are divided and weak and still killing!! This is supposedly from the most educated country in the Eastern/Central Africa area!!!


:p:lool::lool::lool:

:lool::lool::lool:


Wait you had, Gold, oil, a great location, a diverse population etc etc! But, you decided you wanted a KILLER to institute an Islamic state!!! Now you are divided and weak and still killing!! This is supposedly from the most educated country in the Eastern/Central Africa area!!!


:p:lool::lool::lool:

What infantile drivel .. how old are you exactly!?


Ps: I want no part in mixing religion with politics (that includes your own favor)! FYI the Islamists took over in a military putsch mighty mind!

Sudan Tribune

Ethiopia: US launches new drone base in Africa

By Tesfa-Alem Tekle

October 28, 2011 (ADDIS ABABA) - The United States has begun operating drones from a new base in Ethiopia from which US Air Forces will coordinate and fly drones against targets in the Horn of Africa region.

A US military official on Thursday confirmed to the Washington Post that the new base, which is positioned in Arba-Minch town, some 480km south of Addis Ababa, is now operational.

The new base is part of the counter-terrorism missions by the US to cripple activities of Al-Qaeda linked Islamist militants and their affiliates inside war-ravaged Somalia.

Addis Ababa is considered a valued partner against terrorism by the United States considering Ethiopia’s proximity to Somalia.

"The operation will continue as long as the government of Ethiopia welcomes our cooperation on these varied security programs," said Master Sergeant James Fisher, a spokesman for the 17th Air Force, which oversees operations in Africa.

The US military has reportedly committed millions of dollars to upgrade the drone base described as a remote civilian airport in the Horn of Africa’s nation.

The military official added that an undisclosed number of air force personnel are deployed at the Ethiopian airfield "to provide operation and technical support for our security assistance programs."

Drone Aircrafts, commonly known as, the Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have the capacity to carry missiles and satellite guided bombs for attacks and are commonly used by the US in Afghanistan.

However US officials said that the drones from the Ethiopian base will not be used for air strikes but only for surveillance purpose against Al-Shabab and Al-Qaeda linked operatives in Somalia.

The US has a long established drone base in Djibouti where it carries out air strikes against targets inside Somalia and Yemen. The Obama administration’s growing intention to expand drone bases in the African region is believed also to address the concerns and challenges of rising piracy off the Somali coast.

(ST)


http://www.sudantribune.com/Ethiopia-US-launchs-new-drone-base,40564

I wonder if these Kenyan jets in the news are the new Afrikan Alphas:confused:
On first glance they look pretty 'made in the usa' to me. Lawd have mercy on these Africans.:mad: