Misgivings aired about US Africa Command
By Desmond Butler, Associated Press Writer | July 15, 2008
WASHINGTON --Some U.S. officials fear the U.S. military's new regional command in Africa is poorly defined and could usurp the State Department's role in U.S. foreign policy there, according to a congressional investigator.
John Pendleton, investigator for the Government Accountability Office, also told a House panel Tuesday that the Defense Department has made progress in establishing its Africa Command but may have drastically underestimated the costs.
The Defense Department created AFRICOM last October to consolidate operations that had been split among three other regional commands, none of which had Africa as a primary focus.
The Defense Department has said that AFRICOM is intended to have a broader focus than other regional command operations. It is intended to help bolster stability and development in Africa as well as security. Unlike America's other global combat commands, plans for AFRICOM call for a civilian deputy responsible for coordinating with other U.S. government agencies on humanitarian operations.
Those goals have provoked misgivings by African countries and some U.S. agencies that the Defense Department might be encroaching on U.S. diplomatic and aid policies.
The Defense Department "has encountered some concerns from civilian agencies, African partners, and nongovernmental organizations over what the command is and what it hopes to accomplish," Pendleton said. "For example, State and U.S. Agency for International Development officials noted that the creation of AFRICOM could blur traditional boundaries between diplomacy, development and defense, thereby militarizing U.S. foreign policy."
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
The three faces of AFRICOM...
(...Maybe because their still being confused with an ICT provider? I still think this is kinda ironic!)
*
On June 30th, 2008 The Family Clone says:
*
The TransAfrica view of AFRICOM:
The Bush Administration’s policy of engagement also includes a plan to expand the U.S. military footprint with the new U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM).
AFRICOM represents a commitment to the promotion and protection of U.S. state and corporate interests above those of African citizens.
TransAfrica Forum opposes the further expansion of the US Africa Command because we are concerned that AFRICOM will result in the militarization of development and diplomacy on the Continent.
*
The Africom view of AFRICOM:
http://www.africom.mil/africomFAQs.asp
~What is U.S. Africa Command designed to do?
U.S. Africa Command better enables the Department of Defense and other elements of the U.S. government to work in concert and with partners to achieve a more stable environment in which political and economic growth can take place.
~ Does AFRICOM threaten the sovereignty of other nations?
No. U.S. Africa Command will in no way infringe on the sovereignty of any African nation. Africa Command is an administrative reorganization of long-existing U.S. military relationships with African nations and organizations, just as the U.S. Defense Department coordinates relationships with nations and regional organizations throughout the world.
*
The African view of AFRICOM:
Africom leads in providing superior ICT
http://www.afri-com.com/html/ict.asp
Africom, the leading information communication technology providers in Zimbabwe continues to offer superior communication to all its valued customers.
Africom is able to offer both up to date data and voice connectivity solutions through their robust technology.
As its name suggests, Africom has a continental vision.
It sees its mission as to deploy, manage and market superior information and communication technology not only in Zimbabwe but in Africa as a whole.
The Trick is up
Centuries of raping Africa illicitly for its vast resources under cover of fake revolutions and dictator puppets is over. China pulled the US card by doing successful business on the continent. Now the western corporations that picked up the loot third party outside of Africa once it was smuggled out must play on the front side. In order to accomplish this they need their military Rotweiler to stabilize the region they intentionally destabilized after the so-called wave of independence hit.
Example: The blood diamonds were made more expensive than the trick revolution productions they put on to gain third party Antwerp access by international humanitarian pressure. Feeding both sides weapons became more difficult as the world took notice who was doing the supplying.
The latest trick is the raw mineral ( coltan ) found in most cell phone batteries is being smuggled out to major corporations under cover of the Congo civil war. So that battery in your phone may be labeled a blood battery if they don't stabilize and start real commerce.
And the logo
I think folks had missgivings from the start.
Having DOD coordinating humanitarian and diplomatic efforts ("bolster stability and development") in Africa is a bad idea. Although on the other hand "Hey it's US under Bush at least putting money into Africa".
Having the US African command headquartered in Germany is also bad form to begin with.
And well:
http://inteldump.powerblogs.com/posts/1205624073.shtml
How much did they pay for that logo?
In house design team?
They just gave the design job to a random Lieutenant Colonel who knew photo shop?
Did design teams bid on that contract?
Was it designed by some jokester who used to contribute to adbusters?
Is it supposed to rep the cradle of civilization?
Is it supposed to rep the horror of female circumcision?
I have seen lots of African organizations that use African shield shape as a logo, and this is by far the worst. Everytime I see it, it just screams "we threw something together and don't care what it looks like". I guess you shouldn't judge a book by its cover. But I assume the same ammount of thought and care was put into organizing Africom as was put into designing their logo.
Holy shit
That looks like it should be titled "The Rape of Africa."