From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Where is the US?...French soldiers begin patrols in wartorn Congo
The intervention follows the bitter failure of a small band of UN peacekeepers in Bunia to prevent a battle between ethnic groups for the town last month that claimed at least 500 lives and displaced about 250,000 people. This mission exposes the racist imperialist foreign policy of the Bush administration. Black faces don't get US protection, even in the recent genocides. Does the US public even cares? America has a double standard at home and abroad.
Under the local authority's murderous glare, a contingent of 100 French special forces landed in the north-eastern Democratic Republic of Congo's capital of Bunia yesterday to begin their intervention in the conflict that has claimed more lives than any other since the second world war.
Within minutes of their dawn arrival, the troops began securing Bunia's airstrip for an anticipated force of 1,400 European peacekeepers which may contain British soldiers.
Five British military planners also arrived in Bunia yesterday to consider the feasibility of deploying a small British team likely to comprise non-combat personnel.
The intervention follows the bitter failure of a small band of UN peacekeepers in Bunia to prevent a battle between ethnic groups for the town last month that claimed at least 500 lives and displaced about 250,000 people.
The helplessness of the blue-bereted, mostly Uruguayan force caused the first serious international attention to the civil war in Congo's north-eastern Ituri province.
"I have not given orders for battle ... and we have not encountered any enemy," the French colonel in charge said yesterday. "But if someone engages us, we have the capacity to respond."
The battle for Bunia involved the militias of the local Hema and Lendu peoples, who were armed and chaotically commanded by Uganda and Rwanda, the principal invaders who are also hostile to each other.
Many of the victorious Hema fighters - of the Union of Congolese Patriots (UPC) - had left Bunia yesterday. Of those who remained, most were unarmed. "Our orders are not to carry many guns," said Michel Ilunga, a UPC fighter toying with a water-pistol on Bunia's main street. "We won't fight the French."
The US will not fund the non-UN force; yet Uganda and Rwanda are thought to have approved the intervention only at its bidding, loosening their grasp on Congo's fabulously mineral-rich north-east.
"This is the first window of opportunity for peace in eastern Congo," said François Grignon, of the International Crisis Group, one of the few analysts focused on a war that has claimed an estimated 4.7 million lives. "This intervention is a very promising start, but much more must still be done."
France agreed to lead the force after the UN admitted its inability to stop the war which has been described by some, even in the UN, as a genocide.
The European force has a more belligerent mandate to protect Congo's brutalised civilians than the Uruguayans had. Yet, crucially, according to Mr Grignon, it still has no plans to patrol Bunia's outlying hills, or to remain in Congo after the arrival of more UN peacekeepers in September.
"These soldiers are to do a specific task in Bunia," said Col Daniel Vollot, the commander of UN forces in Ituri. "They have no orders to leave the town."
That will provide little reassurance to the majority of Ituri's people, who have witnessed their friends and family being murdered by the hundred in the tit-for-tat massacres raging outside the town.
But Bunia was already recovering yesterday. In its makeshift clinic, Kapo Adiu, a nurse, reported no new cases of wounded in over two weeks.
In its main market - formerly littered with corpses - a few vendors did a roaring trade in cigarettes, medicine and soap.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003.
Within minutes of their dawn arrival, the troops began securing Bunia's airstrip for an anticipated force of 1,400 European peacekeepers which may contain British soldiers.
Five British military planners also arrived in Bunia yesterday to consider the feasibility of deploying a small British team likely to comprise non-combat personnel.
The intervention follows the bitter failure of a small band of UN peacekeepers in Bunia to prevent a battle between ethnic groups for the town last month that claimed at least 500 lives and displaced about 250,000 people.
The helplessness of the blue-bereted, mostly Uruguayan force caused the first serious international attention to the civil war in Congo's north-eastern Ituri province.
"I have not given orders for battle ... and we have not encountered any enemy," the French colonel in charge said yesterday. "But if someone engages us, we have the capacity to respond."
The battle for Bunia involved the militias of the local Hema and Lendu peoples, who were armed and chaotically commanded by Uganda and Rwanda, the principal invaders who are also hostile to each other.
Many of the victorious Hema fighters - of the Union of Congolese Patriots (UPC) - had left Bunia yesterday. Of those who remained, most were unarmed. "Our orders are not to carry many guns," said Michel Ilunga, a UPC fighter toying with a water-pistol on Bunia's main street. "We won't fight the French."
The US will not fund the non-UN force; yet Uganda and Rwanda are thought to have approved the intervention only at its bidding, loosening their grasp on Congo's fabulously mineral-rich north-east.
"This is the first window of opportunity for peace in eastern Congo," said François Grignon, of the International Crisis Group, one of the few analysts focused on a war that has claimed an estimated 4.7 million lives. "This intervention is a very promising start, but much more must still be done."
France agreed to lead the force after the UN admitted its inability to stop the war which has been described by some, even in the UN, as a genocide.
The European force has a more belligerent mandate to protect Congo's brutalised civilians than the Uruguayans had. Yet, crucially, according to Mr Grignon, it still has no plans to patrol Bunia's outlying hills, or to remain in Congo after the arrival of more UN peacekeepers in September.
"These soldiers are to do a specific task in Bunia," said Col Daniel Vollot, the commander of UN forces in Ituri. "They have no orders to leave the town."
That will provide little reassurance to the majority of Ituri's people, who have witnessed their friends and family being murdered by the hundred in the tit-for-tat massacres raging outside the town.
But Bunia was already recovering yesterday. In its makeshift clinic, Kapo Adiu, a nurse, reported no new cases of wounded in over two weeks.
In its main market - formerly littered with corpses - a few vendors did a roaring trade in cigarettes, medicine and soap.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003.
For more information:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/congo/story/0,12...
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
And then whine because we didn't do it right.
We did not have a problem in Iraq until you yankess came. Now their is crime just like America. Before we have peace between factions now we are at civil war. Go home and fix crime and drugs and 11,000 gun muders a year and 1in 5 american Children in poverty and gang violence and and and and and ..........
As far as US involvement in Congo, this is a EU operation, not a UN operation. France isn't exactly committed to a whole lot of places right now, so I dont think its too hard for them to send a few hundred of their soldiers to the Congo to support this EU force.. And their soldiers are really quite good despite all the jokes, so I dont see any reason for the US to be there.
And for the times the states has interfered with other African countries, they are far too numerous to mention, but please, if you don't believe me go look it up in the CIA archive files.
The instances of interventionism and meddling in foreign politics since are two numerous to list but some of the accounts are available from the books Killing Hope by William Blum and A Peoples History Of The United States By Howard Zinn. Or the following web sites for more info:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com http://www.serendipity.li/cia.html http://www.michaelparenti.org/ http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/index.cfm
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm
http://www.americanstateterrorism.com/vietnamgenocide/MyLaiPhoenix.html
While you can bet that U.S. government will not be sending large numbers of U.S. troops anywhere that does not affect the interests of big business or economic expansionism it may be a good thing since if the U.S. Military was to get involved in the Congo you could probably add another 3 or 4 million more deaths to the toll.
The U.S. is not in the Congo because we do not need to be the world's police force. In addition, we do not want to get involved in civil wars. Yes, we went into the Balkans. The europeans begged us to go because when a large military operation is required, everyone, except Iraq, requests assistance or leadership from the U.S.
Get over the oil thing. If we wanted Iraqi oil, we would simply have lifted the sanctions against Iraq. We would also open up our markets to Iran. This would certainly ended OPEC.
Back to the Congo. When and where are the protests?
These two things contradict each other.
What are you trying to say here, that we only want to get involved in civil wars if the rest of the world pursuades us, or we don't want to get involved in civil wars, period?
Both cannot be true. They are mutually preclusive. So which is it?
French company TotalFina/Elf has drugged and armed for years 3 clans for savage slaughters to prevent democracy, prevent sharing profit with local people. French parliament was aware of this.
> Saddam's regime was toppled the future of the
> French Oil Companies investments with Saddam's > regime would be compromised.
:) I doubt than even Chiraq believed that he could force 150.000 pre-positioned GIs to return home without having fired their weapons. Oil companies's interests are _now_ compromised in Iraq, and it is a perfectly “foreseeable” consequence of the Chirac policy (And he was aware of that). It would have been 100 times easier for France to politically back USA despite the hostile public opinion, then to let the USA do the dirty job, and to finally take advantage of lucrative post-war contracts (Have a look to Italy and Spain leaders policy!)
> French were in the position of power the U.S. is in
> they would behave very similarly (in fact this is
> historically accurate for any nation-state) and if you
> doubt this then read up on the history of French
> Imperialism in Indochina 1858-1954.
France has learnt the hard way that imperialism is now longer a politically viable option (70.000 French soldier died in Indochina). Despite a clear military "victory", Algeria was decolonized, and the same process has repeated for African colonies.