Protect Democracy & Expose Western Liberal Democracy

Posts tagged ‘libya’

Check If You Are Really Sudanese?


The Sudan map

The Sudan map

Check If You Are Really Sudanese?

Any citizen in the Sudan must truly feel and shows respect, compassion and love to residents, refugees and nationals from all the neighboring countries of the Sudan.

If any Sudanese national does not feel and show deep respect, compassion and love to residents, refugees and nationals from: Eritrea; Ethiopia; South Sudan; Central African Republic; Chad; Libya; and Egypt he or she cannot be truly Sudanese.

Only fake Sudanese nationals who were illegal immigrants from far countries then acquired Sudanese nationality illegally cannot feel and show true respect, compassion and love to residents, refugees and nationals from all the neighboring countries of the Sudan.

Check If You Are Really Sudanese or leave the Sudan for the true Sudanese people?

تحقق مما إذا كنت سوداني الجنسية حقا؟

أي مواطن في السودان يجب أن يشعر و يظهر الاحترام والتعاطف و المحبة للمقيمين و المواطنين و اللاجئين من جميع الدول المجاورة للسودان

إذا لم يشعر أي مواطن سوداني و يظهر بصدق الاحترام والتعاطف و المحبة للمقيمين و المواطنين و اللاجئين من : إريتريا؛ إثيوبيا ؛ جنوب السودان؛ جمهورية افريقيا الوسطى؛ تشاد؛ ليبيا ؛ و مصر فهو أو هي لا يمكن ان يكونوا سوداني الجنسية حقا

المواطنين السودانيين من أصول أجنبية من مهاجرين غير شرعيين من دول بعيدة ثم اكتسبوا الجنسية السودانية بطريقة غير مشروعة و فاسدة هم فقط الذين لا يمكن أن يشعروا ويظهروا الاحترام والتعاطف و المحبة للمقيمين و المواطنين و اللاجئين من جميع الدول المجاورة للسودان

تحقق مما إذا كنت سوداني الجنسية حقا أو اترك السودان للسودانيين الحقيقيين

 

 

Gulf Arab Countries Must Be Democratized Now


Heads of States of the Gulf Cooperation Council GCC

Heads of States of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)

The world know very well that fair, free and transparent governance is essential demand and right for all nations without exceptions. The USA, France and Britain are increasingly imposing non-peaceful and military changes to Arab states and to North and West Africa. Gulf Arab states, like Qatar, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates, are instrumental in the western new invasive policy of bringing freedom, justice and democracy to other Arab states like Syria, Egypt and Yemen.

(more…)

The Age of Deception: Nuclear Diplomacy in Treacherous Times


The Age of Deception by Mohamed ElBaradei

The author of this book is the Nobel Prize laureate, Egyptian law scholar and diplomat, and the former Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for three successive terms from 1997 to 2009, Mohamed ElBaradei. He declined to avail his services  for a further fourth term in the IAEA; and the IAEA Board of Governors was split in its decision regarding the next director general. After several rounds of voting, on July 3, 2009, Mr. Yukiya Amano, Japanese ambassador to the IAEA, was elected as the next IAEA director general.

The following book review was written by George Perkovich, Director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and co-editor of “Abolishing Nuclear Weapons: A Debate.” The book review was posted on The Washington Post on 21 April 2011.

This book was published by Metropolitan Books (in 352 pages),
(April 26, 2011).

George Perkovich said in his review:
[Mohamed ElBaradei fought the Bush administration over the war in Iraq, blocked it from attacking Iran, and for his efforts received harassment from American hardliners and, eventually, the Nobel Peace Prize. Now, having retired from the International Atomic Energy Agency, he plans to run for president of Egypt. He has interesting stories to tell, and he tells them with verve.

Like other presidential aspirants, ElBaradei places himself in a flattering light and takes the popular side of issues voters care about. But “The Age of Deception” is more than a campaign biography: Written before the recent Egyptian upheaval, it reaches far beyond the politics of Cairo. The struggles ElBaradei waged in Iraq, North Korea, Iran and Libya to shape the international management of nuclear technology represent a central dynamic of the 21st century.

Will rule of law trump unilateralism? Can a progressive international order be built when states differ over which rules should be strengthened and how they should be enforced, and when rulers in North Korea, Burma, Syria and Iran reject norms that others respect? ElBaradei’s vivid narrative brings these and other big questions to life.

“I am totally against wars,” a 12-year-old Spanish girl named Alicia wrote to ElBaradei after he received the Nobel Prize in 2005. “I thank you very much for your efforts to try to avoid the war in Iraq. Despite the fact that your strategy, based on dialogue, was absolutely not to the liking of the USA, you knew how to stay firm and you showed that there were not nuclear weapons in Iraq, even while gaining the hate of the most powerful country.”

Alicia sums up“The Age of Deception” in many ways. ElBaradei repeatedly describes the nuclear infractions of North Korea, Iran, Libya and other nations and then insinuates that the United States should be blamed for scaring them into misbehaving or impeding him from working out fair-minded solutions with Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, North Korea’s Kim Jong Il and Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. For example: The Iranians “were busily undermining the very solution they had worked so hard to achieve,” he writes after learning in 2006 that officials of former president Mohammad Khatami’s administration planned to attack the new president Ahmadinejad politically if he agreed to a deal with Washington. “I sighed. Tehran had been spending way too much time watching D.C. politics, I thought.” And: North Korea is “isolated, impoverished, feeling deeply threatened by the United States but nonetheless defiant.”

Libya had in the 1990s secretly bought uranium enrichment equipment and a blueprint for a nuclear weapon from the infamous network of Pakistan’s A.Q. Khan. This had not been detected by the International Atomic Energy Agency, but by British and American intelligence. ElBaradei was briefed before the story broke in December 2003. “I was told,” he writes, “that the genesis of the Libyan nuclear weapon program — and Gaddafi’s other WMD programs — was in retaliation for the April 1986 U.S. bombing raids during which Gaddafi’s adopted daughter, Hannah, was killed.” One is left to wonder whether he thought the Libyan terrorist attacks weeks earlier that killed Americans on TWA flight 840 and in the La Belle disco in Berlin were irrelevant, for he does not mention them. He does describe meeting Gaddafi who “spoke earnestly of his desire to develop Libya.”

Young Alicia tapped into ElBaradei’s wishful credo in another portion of her letter. “I hope that in the conflict with Iran you are luckier and that things get solved by using dialogue and not through arms,” she wrote. “And that the politicians of the USA accept the opinion of the UN.” But the world is not as nice as 12-year-old girls wish. Some states are ruled through violent repression, and even if their leaders are willing to compromise on some things, they may not accept peaceably the enforcement of international rules they violate, including resolutions of the U.N. Security Council.

Iran’s leadership is portrayed as fearful of the United States and very difficult to deal with. Still, ElBaradei insisted that Tehran would significantly constrain nuclear activities that could be used for military purposes if only Washington would take “yes” for an answer. ElBaradei makes no mention of the Iranian strategy revealed by the Khatami government’s chief negotiator, Hassan Rowhani, in a July 2005 interview. Rowhani, an urbane cleric since displaced by President Ahmadinejad, declared, “wherever we accepted suspension” of a nuclear activity, “we thought about another activity.” When Tehran suspended work on uranium enrichment at Natanz, it “put all of [its] efforts” into uranium conversion at Esfahan. This stall-and-advance, bait-and-switch approach continues today.

ElBaradei offers no insight into what can and should be done when unaccountable leaders refuse to accede to the requirements of the IAEA or the U.N. Nor does he address the possibility that despotic regimes cling to nuclear-weapons capability to protect their rule against domestic and foreign pressures for change.

The high-minded dialogue ElBaradei repeatedly calls for is not always sufficient, leaving the reader to wonder what then? Certainly, the United States should be more committed and supple in its diplomacy. Washington needs to realize that the states it fears are even more fearful of its power and judgment. But that is far from sufficient to solve the tough nuclear cases. President Obama, despite his Nobel credentials, has been unable to resolve the nuclear impasse in North Korea and Iran, or to persuade France, Russia, China, Pakistan and others to join him in moving towards a world without nuclear weapons.

ElBaradei displays an enmity toward Western nuclear-armed states that is sometimes overt and sometimes subtle, sometimes deserved and sometimes unfair. A fascinating mix of emotions and calculations seems to animate his analysis. Anyone wishing to glimpse some of the central tensions in 21st-century international diplomacy should read “The Age of Deception.”]

US Corrupt Diplomacy Assisting Islamists and Activists in Syria


According to Wikileaks Cables as posted at Al-Akhbar English it is clear that bringing democracy and human rights are the convenient way for the USA for selective regime change. This is done in the Arab region where the major rich partners of the USA are neither democratic in any way, nor even recognizing many basic human rights.

Deceptive US Diplomacy

The World must define exactly what the US administrations mean by “Diplomacy”, “Democracy”, “Human Rights” and “Foreign Policy”. These values are great but the USA must adhere to decent laws and acceptable code of conduct. The USA must not make immoral shortcuts to achieve their real goals; or pretend to serve these principles while actually peoples are being used and their ambitions are exploited, including the Americans.

Show us the Money!

Date: 9/23/2009 13:36
refid: 09DAMASCUS692
Origin: Embassy Damascus
Classification: SECRET//NOFORN
Destination: 09DAMASCUS477|09DAMASCUS534|09DAMASCUS620

Over the past six months, SARG security agents have increasingly questioned civil society and human rights activists about U.S. programming in Syria and the region, including U.S. Speaker and MEPI initiatives.
Over the past six months, civil society and human rights activists questioned by SARG security have told us interrogators asked specifically about their connections to the U.S. Embassy and the State Department. XXXXXXXXXXXX questioned about MEPI-funded Democracy Council activities as well as visiting State Department officials.

It is unclear to what extent SARG intelligence services understand how USG money enters Syria and through which proxy organizations. What is clear, however, is that security agents are increasingly focused on this issue when they interrogate human rights and civil society activists. The information agents are able to frame their questions with more and more specific information and names. XXXXXXXXXXXX suggest the SARG has keyed in on MEPI operations in particular.

Except for the Netherlands’ public stalling of the EU Association Agreement over human rights, Syrian activists have heard little in the way of support from the international community.

Murky Alliances

Date: 7/8/2009 13:03
refid: 09DAMASCUS477
Origin: Embassy Damascus
Classification: SECRET//NOFORN
Destination: 07DAMASCUS1156|09DAMASCUS185

The Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Syria Website published a “letter” on June 11 accusing external Damascus Declaration committees of violating the Damascus Declaration National Council’s bylaws on electing members to the General Secretariat. XXXXXXXXXXXX and explained the Muslim Brotherhood’s protest stemmed from the external Damascus Declaration committees’ failure to coordinate with the MB in setting up the external political structures meant to compliment the Damascus Declaration’s internal structures.

The rancor expressed in the MB’s letter suggested a growing fissure between expatriate Damascus Declaration representatives, especially between the MB and the small, but politically connected and increasingly active Movement for Justice and Development (MJD). More worrisome, however, is recent information suggesting the SARG may already have penetrated the MJD and learned about sensitive USG programs in Syria.

Background
Since 2005, internal squabbles among political parties signatory to the Damascus Declaration have stalled, but never obstructed, the organization’s forward progress. Disputes ranged from how vocal the organization should be in condemning U.S. policies in the region (ref A) to whether the Damascus Declaration should distance itself from the MB.

Nasserists and nationalists of varying stripes, especially those in the Arab Socialist Democratic Party, whose participation in the Damascus Declaration was permitted by the SARG as a wedge to create division among reformist ranks, proved especially adamant in their rejection of the MB. The Nasserists, XXXXXXXXXXXX told us, insisted the MB’s involvement provoked the SARG; for the Damascus Declaration to continue safely, MB participation would have to be jettisoned.

MJD vs. Muslim Brotherhood
Since 2008, expatriates have formed Damascus Declaration committees throughout Europe and the United States. Initially, XXXXXXXXXXXX remarked, little coordination existed among the nascent “external committees” in the U.S., Britain, Belgium, France, and Germany. The MB, despite having a developed network in Europe and being signatory to the original Declaration, was left on the margin.

The MB did not comment on the formation of the committees, nor was the MB’s input sought by those putting the committees together, XXXXXXXXXXXX said. XXXXXXXXXXXX added that the purpose of these committees was to put in place a temporary, seven person panel that could elect a small number of external representatives to the General Secretariat, an idea consistent with the founders intentions for the General Secretariat’s structure.

XXXXXXXXXXXX asked the representative of the London-based Damascus Declaration committee, Anas al-Abdah — who was also the leader of the Movement for Justice and Development, a self-professed moderate Islamic organization (ref B) — to contact the MB and invite them to participate in the formation and elections of the ad hoc political panel.

“After a year,” XXXXXXXXXXXX lamented, “nothing has been achieved. Abdah claimed he tried to contact them, but this is hard to prove.” XXXXXXXXXXXX added that other external Damascus Declaration committee members had reported back that they too had attempted to contact the MB without success. XXXXXXXXXXXX told us XXXXXXXXXXXX doubted attempts at contact commenced until it was effectively beside the point — that is, after the MB broke with the NSF and disavowed opposition activities in response to the Israeli attacks on Gaza. By then, he said, it was too late; the MB felt slighted by the external committees. When the MB broke from the NSF, XXXXXXXXXXXX said, “I tried to push XXXXXXXXXXXX to contact them directly,” to ask them to participate in the formation of the external political structure. “I said directly, not through (Anas) Abdah because I know competition among groups outside causes problems,” XXXXXXXXXXXX recounted. XXXXXXXXXXXX

According to XXXXXXXXXXXX, it was the external committees’ disregard for MB participation that prompted the Brotherhood to draft and publish its incendiary letter. XXXXXXXXXXXX said “some people are now saying the MB isn’t serious about joining in the Damascus Declaration’s work” and that the letter is just an excuse — they have already renounced opposition activities and do not plan to resume them against Syria. XXXXXXXXXXXX cautioned, “I think this comes from outside, not in Syria,” and that it is not true. XXXXXXXXXXXX argued MB participation in the Damascus Declaration was essential, observing, “The MB is the largest Islamic group in the country; the MJD is just a few people.”

MJD: A Leaky Boat?
XXXXXXXXXXXX had told us in the past (ref B) that the MJD (1) had many members who were formerly with the MB; (2) was at odds with the MB and sought to marginalize it abroad; (3) was seeking to expand its base in Syria, though it had not been successful; and (4) had been initially lax in its security, often speaking about highly sensitive material on open lines. The first three points speak directly to the ongoing feud and the MB’s recent letter of protest. XXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXX told us security services had asked whether XXXXXXXXXXXX had met with anyone from our “Foreign Ministry” and with anyone from the Democracy Council (Comment: State Department Foreign Affairs Officer Joseph Barghout had recently been in Syria XXXXXXXXXXXX; we assume the SARG was fishing for information, knowing Barghout had entered the country. Jim Prince was in Damascus on February 25, XXXXXXXXXXXX

Born not as a political party, but as an umbrella organization composed of many different groups, the Damascus Declaration has been handicapped by internal divisions among unlikely allies: the Kurds, the MB, liberals, national socialists, communists and others. XXXXXXXXXXXX MJD’s organizational successes so far might best be explained as the by-products of its relationship with XXXXXXXXXXXX and the USG. Evidence the organization has a sizable, influential constituency inside and outside Syria is difficult to discern. Post has seen no reporting on the size MJD’s base in Europe and the U.S. XXXXXXXXXXXX; therefore it would not surprise us if an external committee member like Anas Abdah, who heads both the Damascus Declaration’s external London committee and the MJD, would drag his feet when asked to contact the MB.

XXXXXXXXXXXX report begs the question of how much and for how long the SARG has known about Democracy Council operations in Syria and, by extension, the MJD’s participation. Reporting in other channels suggest the Syrian Muhabarat may already have penetrated the MJD and is using MJD contacts to track U.S. democracy programming. If the SARG does know, but has chosen not to intervene openly, it raises the possibility that the SARG may be mounting a campaign to entrap democracy activists receiving illegal (under Syrian law) foreign assistance.

Behavior Reform

Date: 4/28/2009 13:24
refid: 09DAMASCUS306
Origin: Embassy Damascus
Classification: SECRET
Destination: 09DAMASCUS129|09DAMASCUS185|09DAMASCUS272

This cable represents a follow-up to “Re-engaging Syria: Human Rights” (ref A) and outlines ongoing civil society programming in the country, primarily under the auspices of the Bureau of Human Rights and Labor (DRL) and the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI).

Both MEPI and DRL fund projects on which Post has varying degrees of visibility. Some programs may be perceived, were they made public, as an attempt to undermine the Asad regime, as opposed to encouraging behavior reform. In an effort to assist any Department level discussions on the SARG’s attitude toward human rights, this cable describes a possible strategy for framing the human rights discussion as an area of “mutual concern” for Syria and the U.S.

The New Policy Front
As the Syria policy review moves apace, and with the apparent collapse of the primary Syrian external opposition organization, one thing appears increasingly clear: U.S. policy may aim less at fostering “regime change” and more toward encouraging “behavior reform.” If this assumption holds, then a reassessment of current U.S.-sponsored programming that supports anti-SARG factions, both inside and outside Syria, may prove productive as well.

The U.S. attempt to politically isolate the SARG raised stumbling blocks to direct Embassy involvement in civil society programming. As a result, the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) and the Bureau of Human Rights and Labor (DRL) took the lead in identifying and funding civil society and human rights projects. Though the Embassy has had direct input on a few of these efforts, especially with DRL, most of the programming has proceeded without direct Embassy involvement.

DRL
DRL funded four major Syria-specific programs in the previous fiscal year. The grant recipients were (1) Freedom House, which conducted multiple workshops for a select group of Syrian activists on “strategic non-violence and civic mobilization;” (2) the American Bar Association, which held a conference in Damascus in July and then continued outreach with the goal of implementing legal education programs in Syria through local partners; (3) American University, which has conducted research on Syrian tribal and civil society by inviting shaykhs from six tribes to Beirut for interviews and training; and (4) Internews, which has coordinated with the Arab Women Media Center to support media youth camps for university-aged Syrians in both Amman and Damascus. In addition to these programs, the Embassy provided input on DRL grants awarded to Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), International War and Peace Reporting (IWPR), and The International Research and Exchange Board (IREX). Though Post does not directly monitor any of these programs, we have appreciated the opportunity to meet with representatives of CIPE and IWPR.

MEPI
In addition to smaller local grants, MEPI sponsors eight major Syria-specific initiatives, some dating back to 2005 that will have received approximately USD 12 million by September 2010. A summary of MEPI produced material on these programs follows:
-Aspen Strategic Initiative Institute, “Supporting Democratic Reform” (USD 2,085,044, December 1, 2005 – December 31, 2009). The institute, situated in Berlin, works with indigenous and expatriate reform-oriented activists and has sponsored conferences in international locations that brought together NGO representatives, media, and human rights activists from the Middle East, Europe, and the U.S., paying particular attention to Syrian Kurds. MEPI noted that “while this program has offered little intrinsic value and will not likely be continued beyond the terms of the grant, XXXXXXXXXXXX
-Democracy Council of California, “Civil Society Strengthening Initiative (CSSI)” (USD 6,300,562, September 1, 2006 – September 30, 2010). “CSSI is a discrete collaborative effort between the Democracy Council and local partners” that has produced XXXXXXXXXXXX “various broadcast concepts” set to air in April.
-Regents of the University of New Mexico, “The Cooperative Monitoring Center-Amman: Web Access for Civil Society Initiatives” (USD 949,920, September 30, 2006 – September 30, 2009). This project established “a web portal” and training in how to use it for NGOs. MEPI noted, “this program has been of minimal utility and is unlikely to be continued beyond the term of the grant.”
-XXXXXXXXXXXX
-XXXXXXXXXXXX
-International Republican Institute (IRI), “Supporting Democratic Reform” (USD 1,250,000, September 30, 2006 – August 31, 2009). “The project supports grassroots public awareness campaigns and the conduct and dissemination of public opinion polling research. XXXXXXXXXXXX
-XXXXXXXXXXXX
-XXXXXXXXXXXX
-MEPI has also proposed continued programming for IRI and the CIPE, as well as supporting independent journalists through joint efforts with NEA/PI.

Challenge Ahead: Programming In Syria
Regarding the most sensitive MEPI-sponsored programs in Syria, Post has had limited visibility on specific projects, due in no small measure to SARG-imposed constraints. XXXXXXXXXXXX. Through the intermediary operations of the Movement for Justice and Development (MJD) (ref B), a London-based moderate Islamist group, MEPI routes money XXXXXXXXXXXX. Our understanding is that the aforementioned Democracy Council grant is used for this purpose and passes the MEPI grant money on to the MJD.

The SARG would undoubtedly view any U.S. funds going to illegal political groups as tantamount to supporting regime change. This would inevitably include the various expatriate reform organizations operating in Europe and the U.S., most of which have little to no effect on civil society or human rights in Syria.

Strategic Thinking: Next Steps
The current review of policy toward Syria offers the USG an opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to human rights through the strategic and incremental opening of dialogue between the two countries. The core issues facing a human rights strategy for Syria are (1) how best to advise the SARG that its tolerating dissent will be a key issue as our bilateral relationship moves forward; and (2) how to bring our U.S.-sponsored civil society and human rights programming into line a less confrontational bilateral relationship.

Conversations between U.S. and SARG officials have examined the parameters of what might constitute a “common interest” between the two countries, “shared concerns” upon which to center future bilateral discourse and achieve concrete results. This strategy might prove equally effective in raising human rights with the SARG by clearly articulating how recognizable and sustained behavior change in relation to human rights would enhance SARG’s image, which currently represents a stumbling block to advancing bilateral relations. In the past, both the Department and the White House have made public statements condemning the SARG for its human rights record; these statements have not, unfortunately, produced positive results. Visiting Congressional delegations have also made public statements that have not been met with the desired action by the SARG.

The SARG reacts defensively to public announcements, so more private channels of communication might reinforce a “common interest” theme, allowing the SARG to act without being perceived as bending under U.S. pressure.

Should the current administration wish to send such a message, action on any one of the following five concerns might shift the SARG’s image into a more positive light. (1) The release of specific imprisoned high-profile civil society and human rights activists; (2) credible movement to resolve the citizenship status of stateless Kurds; (3) loosening media restrictions, including Internet censorship; (4) lifting travel bans on Syrian citizens; and (5) following up on promises to establish a “Senate” that would create a legislative space for opposition politicians to work in.

The perennial challenge is how to build programming in Syria without drawing SARG scrutiny to Syrian contacts and Embassy personnel. XXXXXXXXXXXX. If our dialogue with Syria on human rights is to succeed, we need to express the desire to work in Syria to strengthen civil society in a non-threatening manner. We also need to ensure that programming here is fully coordinated, that the Embassy has the resources it needs to administer the programs, and that the programs are compliant with U.S. economic sanctions against Syria.

While DRL- and MEPI-funded programs have explored new areas where we can achieve results, some of our time-honored programs may also prove to be extremely effective. The attractiveness of U.S. culture is still a powerful engine for change in Syria. It is revealing that when the SARG sought to punish the U.S. for its alleged role in the October 26, 2008 attack in Abu Kamal, they avoided political targets and instead shut down the three main sources of American culture in Damascus: the American Culture Center (ACC), the ALC, and the Damascus Community School. Countering with more cultural programming, more speaker programs, and the IV exchange program remain our best tools for having a direct effect on civil society. To this end, VIPs coming to Syria might be uniquely positioned to request and receive opportunities for addressing public audiences.

Operation Sarkozy (Mr Sarkozy and the CIA)


Based on Thierry Meyssan’s “Operation Sarkozy” Robert Thompson wrote at Axis of Logic on July 18, 2008 warning the world and particularly the Arabs, more than three years ago, from eminent dangers which we can see them clearly now in regime change in Ivory Coast, Libya, and the so-called “Arab Spring”:

[A most interesting study dated 14th July 2008 by Thierry Meyssan, entitled Operation Sarkozy, has been brought to my attention on how the CIA managed to place one of its agents, namely Mr Nicolas Sarkozy, as president of the French Republic.

To make his point, Mr Meyssan does not content himself with vague conjecture, but puts together check-able facts relating to the relationship between our President and the CIA (the well-known terrorist organisation financed by the tax-payers in the USA), and the USA establishment in general, with a view to ensuring that French policy should be dramatically re-aligned to serve the interests of the present USA administration (not, of course, the people of the USA).

The links between various arms of the USA establishment and Mr Sarkozy are much closer than I could ever have imagined, although I was aware of a fair number of the facts reported and examined by Mr Meyssan. I had not however thought, and this is indeed my own fault, how closely these links tie up with other links with groups on both sides of the Atlantic allied, or similar, to the Mafia and other conspiratorial bodies based in Italy and neighbouring states as well as being well entrenched in the USA.

Acceptance of the arguments put forward by Mr Meyssan serves to explain many of the otherwise seemingly inexplicable decisions made by Mr Sarkozy since he took over from Jacques Chirac in 2007, as well as giving very personal private reasons (previously totally unknown to me, but then I am not a fan of the gossip columns) for the obvious dislike, and perhaps even hatred, which Mr Chirac has for his successor.

This article should be read by everyone as the implications are extremely serious for the future of the world. I make this claim not because France is still a great power — it is not and most of us recognise this — but it shows a more subtle means of achieving a coup d’etat than using military or other violent means.  Mr Meyssan very carefully tracks the whole story of Mr Sarkozy’s rise within the ranks of the successive parties which have claimed to be “Gaulliste” (as following the broad lines of policy laid down by the General, later President, but many of us still think of him as the great leader during the Second World War from 1940 onwards). It is a tale of most cunning duplicity supported by hyper-intelligent backing from within the USA establishment.

If the conclusions reached by Mr Meyssan are correct, and I can see no reason to doubt his analysis of the facts, then Mr Sarkozy is even more dangerous than he has so far appeared to be, and the poor and the oppressed can expect to suffer almost anywhere in the world from his actions on behalf of his masters in the USA. The Arab world, above all others, can expect to be the victim of highly sophisticated concerted trickery as he does everything that he can to crush any moves which the people may try to make towards freedom from tyranny, wherever such moves might in any way limit the greedy ambitions of those who rule the USA.

Copyright 2008 by AxisofLogic.com]

This material is available for republication as long as reprints include verbatim copy of the article its entirety, respecting its integrity. Reprints must cite the author and Axis of Logic as the original source including a “live link” to the article. Thank you!

The article in question was written by Thierry Meyssan on July 14, 2004.  It was translated for Axis of Logic from French to English by Robert Thompson and was published on Red Ice Creations (a news website and radio program, hosted by founder, filmmaker and researcher Henrik Palmgren.) The following is this translation:

How the CIA planted one of its agents as President of the French Republic

Nicolas Sarkozy

Nicolas Sarkozy should be judged on his actions and not on his personality. But when his actions surprise even his own electors, it is legitimate to examine in detail his biography and to ask about the alliances which brought him to power. Thierry Meyssan decided to write the truth about the origins of the President of the French Republic. All the information contained in this article is verifiable, with the exception of two imputations, pointed out by the author who assumes sole responsibility for them.

The French people, weary of the over-long presidencies of François Mitterrand and Jacques Chirac, elected Nicolas Sarkozy and counted on his energy to revitalise their country. They hoped for a break with the years of immobilism and superannuated ideologies. They have had a break with the principles which form the foundation of the French nation. They have been stupefied by this “hyper president”, every day grabbing hold of another new file, drawing the right and the left to him, thus disposing of all the land-marks to the point of creating complete confusion.

Like children who have just done something very stupid, the French are too busy finding excuses to admit the extent of the damage and of their naïvety. This makes them refuse all the more to see who Nicolas Sarkozy is, which they ought to have realised long ago.

The man is clever. Like an illusionist, he has diverted their attention by offering them his private life as a spectacle and in posing in celebrity magazines, to the point of making them overlook his political history.

Let the sense of this article be fully understood: it is not to reproach Mr Sarkozy with his links of family, friends and professional contacts, but to reproach him with having hidden his links from the French people who believed that they were electing a free man.

To understand how a man in whom all agree they see an agent of the United States and Israel has been able to become the head of the Gaullist party, then the President of the French Republic, one must go back in time. Far back. We must follow a long digression during which we shall introduce the protagonists who are today taking their revenge.

Family secrets
At the end of the Second World War, the USA secret services counted on the Italo-US godfather Lucky Luciano to control the security of American ports and to prepare the allied landings in Sicily.

Luciano’s contacts with the US services passed above all through Frank Wisner Sr. then, when the ‘godfather’ was freed and went into exile in Italy, through his Corsican ‘ambassador’, Étienne Léandri.

In 1958, the United States, worried about a possible victory of the FLN in Algeria which would have opened North Africa to Soviet influence, decided to give rise to a military coup d’état in France. The operation was organised jointly by the Planning Direction of the CIA – in theory run by Frank Wisner Sr.- and by NATO. But Wisner had already sunk into dementia so that it was his successor, Allan Dulles, who supervised the action. From Algiers, the French Generals formed a Committee of Public Safety which exerted pressure on the civil government in Paris and forced it to give full powers to General De Gaulle without any need to use force.

However, Charles De Gaulle was not the pawn whom the Anglo-Saxons believed they could manipulate. To start with, he tried to find a way out of the colonial contradiction by giving wide autonomy to the overseas territories within a French Union. But it was already too late to save the French Empire since the colonised peoples did not believe in the promises from the metropolis and insisted on their independence. After having successfully led fierce campaigns of repression against the independentists, De Gaulle realised what had to be done. Showing rare political wisdom, he decided to give each colony its independence.

This U-turn was seen as a betrayal by most of those who brought him to power. The CIA and NATO then backed all sorts of plots to get rid of him, including a failed putsch and some forty attempts to assassinate him. However, some of his partisans approved of his political evolution. Around Charles Pasqua, they formed the SAC, a militia to protect him.

Pasqua is both a Corsican crook and a former member of the resistance. He married the daughter of a Canadian bootlegger who made a fortune during prohibition. He ran the Ricard company which, after having dealt in absinthe, a forbidden drink, made itself respectable by selling anisette. However, the company continued to serve as a cover for all sorts of deals in relation with the Italo-New Yorker Genovese family, that of Lucky Luciano. It was therefore not surprising that Pasqua called on Étienne Léandri (Luciano’s “ambassador”) to recruit strong arm men and build up a Gaullist militia. A third man played an important role in the formation of the SAC, De Gaulle’s former body-guard, Achille Peretti -another Corsican.

Thus protected, De Gaulle drew up with panache a policy of national independence. While confirming that he belonged to the Atlantic camp, he questioned the Anglo-Saxon leadership. He objected to the entry of the United Kingdom into the European Common Market (1961 and 1967); he refused the deployment of UNO blue helmets in the Congo (1961); he encouraged Latin American states to break free of US imperialism (speech in Mexico, 1964); he expelled NATO from France and withdrew form the Integrated Command Structure of the Atlantic Alliance (1966); he denounced the Viet-Nam War (speech in Phnon Penh, 1966); he condemned Israeli expansionism during the Six Day War (1967); he supported the independence of Quebec (speech in Montreal 1967) ; etc…

At the same time, De Gaulle consolidated France’s power by giving it a military-industrial complex including a nuclear dissuasion force, and by guaranteeing its supply of energy. He usefully separated the troublesome Corsicans from his entourage by giving them overseas missions. Thus Étienne Léandri became the dealer for the Elf group (now Total), while Charles Pasqua became the confidant of the heads of state in French-speaking Africa.

Aware that he could now defy the Anglo-Saxons everywhere at the same time, De Gaulle allied himself with the Rothschild family. He chose as Prime Minister the Director of the Bank, Georges Pompidou. The two men formed an efficient tandem. The political audacity of the first never lost sight of the economic realism of the second.

When De Gaulle resigned, in 1969, Georges Pompidou briefly succeeded him as President before being carried off by cancer. The historical Gaullists did not accept his leadership and were worried by his excessively anglophile attitude. They cried treason when Pompidou, seconded by the Secretary General of the Elyse Eduard Balladur, allowed “perfidious Albion” into the European Common Market.

The making of Nicolas Sarkozy
Having thus described the background, let us come back to our principal personage, Nicolas Sarkozy. Born in 1955, he was the son of a Hungarian nobleman, Pal Sarkösy de Nagy-Bocsa, who fled to France after fleeing the Red Army, and Andrée Mallah, a Jewish lady from Sallonica. After having had three children (Guillaume, Nicolas and François), the couple divorced. Pal Sarkösy de Nagy-Bocsa remarried with an aristocrat, Christine de Ganay, by whom he had two children (Pierre-Olivier and Caroline). Nicolas was not brought up by his parents alone, but passed to and fro in this recomposed family.

His mother became the Secretary of Achille Peretti. After having co-founded the SAC, De Gaulle’s body-guard had pursued a brilliant political career. He was elected Député and Mayor of Neuilly-sur-Seine, the richest suburb of the capital, then President of the National Assembly.

Unhappily, in 1972, Achille Peretti was subject to serious accusations. In the United States, the magazine Time revealed the existence of a secret Corsican criminal organisation the ‘Union corse ‘ which was said to control a large share of the traffic in drugs between Europe and America, the famous “French connection” which Hollywood brought to the screen. Based on parliamentary hearings and its own investigations, Time quoted the name of a Mafia boss, Jean Venturi, arrested some years earlier in Canada, who was no other than the commercial representative of Charles Pasqua for the drinks company Ricard. The names of several families were mentioned who were said to run the “Union corse”, including the Perettis. Achille denied this, but had to resign from the presidency of the National Assembly and even escaped from a “suicide”.

In 1977, Pal Sarközy separated from his second wife, Christine de Ganay, who then linked herself with the number two of the central administration of the Department of State in the United States. She married him and set up home with him in America. The world being small, as is well known, her husband was no other than Frank Wisner Jr., the son of the previous one. The functions of Junior at the CIA are not known, but it was clear that he had an important role there. Nicolas, who remained close to his step-mother, his half-brother and his half-sister, began to turn towards the United States where he “benefitted” from training programmes in the Department of State.

At the same time, Nicolas Sarkozy joined the Gaullist Party. He there met and had contacts with Charles Pasqua more speedily as he was not only a national leader, but also in charge of the local section in the Hauts-de-Seine.

In 1982, Nicolas Sarkozy, having completed his legal training and having been called to the Bar, married Achilles Pretty’s niece. His best man was Charles Pasqual. As an Avocet, Maître Sarkozy looked after the interests of the Corsican friends of his mentors. He bought a property in Corsica, at Vice, and thought of making his name more Corsican by replacing the ‘y’ with an ‘I’: Sarkozy.

The following year, he was elected Mayor of Neuilly-sure-Seine in the place of his uncle-in-law, Achilles Pretty, stricken by a heart attack.

However, Nicolas did not take long to betray his wife and, from 1984 onward, he had a hidden liaison with Cecilia, the wife of the most famous French television personality at the time, Jacques Martin, whom he had met when celebrating their marriage as Mayor of Neuilly. This double life lasted for five years, before the lovers left their respective spouses to set up a new household.

Nicolas was a witness at the marriage, in 1992, of Jacques Chirac’s daughter, Claude, to an editorialist at Le Figaro. he could not stop himself from seducing Claude and to have a brief affair with her, while living officially with Cecilia. The betrayed husband committed suicide by taking drugs. The break between the Chirac’s and Nicolas Sarkozy was brutal and permanent.

In 1993, the left lost the parliamentary elections. President François Mitterrand refused to resign and entered into a cohabitation with a Prime Minister from the right, Jacques Chirac. His ambition was to become President and thought of then forming a tandem with Eduard Balladur comparable with that of De Gaulle and Pompidou, and he refused to be Prime Minister again and left the place to his “friend for over thirty years”, Eduard Balladur. Despite his dubious past, Charles Pasqual became Minister of the Interior. Even if he kept a firm grip Moroccan marijuana, he took advantage of his position to legalise his other activities by taking control of the casinos, gaming and racing in French-speaking Africa. He also established links in Saudi Arabia and in Israel an became an honorary officer in the Mossad. As for Nicolas Sarkozy, he was Minister of the Budget and government spokesman.

Frank Wisner Jr.

In Washington, Frank Wisner Jr. took over from Paul Wolfowitz as being responsible for political planning in the Defence Department. Nobody commented on the links which he had with the French government’s spokesman.

This was when the tension within the Gaullist Party came back as thirty years earlier between the historic Gaullists and the financial right, in the person of Balladur. The novelty was that Charles Pasqua and with him the young Nicolas Sarkozy betrayed Jacques Chirac to come closer to the Rothschild tendency. Everything went wrong. The conflict reached its peak in 1995 when Édouard Balladur put himself forward against his ex-friend Jacques Chirac for the presidential election, and was beaten. Above all, following the instructions received from London and Washington, the Balladur government opened negotiations for adhesion to the European Union and to NATO of the States in Central and Eastern Europe, freed from Soviet control.

Everything went wrong in the Gaullist Party where the friends of yester-year were ready to kill one another. To finance his electoral campaign, Édouard Balladur tried to get hold of the Gaullist Party’s black funds, hidden within the double accounting system of the oil company Elf. Hardly had the old Étienne Léandri died, when Judges looked into the company and its bosses were incarcerated. But Balladur, Pasqua and Sarkozy never managed to recuperate the booty.

Crossing the desert
Throughout his first term, Jacques Chirac kept Nicolas Sarkozy at a distance. The man became discreet during this long period of crossing the desert. Discreetly, he continued to make links in financial circles.

In 1996, Nicolas Sarkozy having finally managed to end an endless divorce procedure married Cécilia. As witnesses they had the two billionaires Martin Bouygues and Bernard Arnaud (the richest man in the country).

Last act
Well before the Iraq crisis, Frank Wisner Jr. and his colleagues at the CIA were planning the destruction of the Gaullist line and the rise in power of Nicolas Sarkozy. They acted in three stages: firstly the elimination of the leaders of the Gaullist Party and taking over this body, then the elimination of the principal rival on the right and the investiture by the Gaullist Party for the presidential election, and finally the elimination of any serious challenger from the left in order to be sure of carrying off the presidential election.

For years, the media were kept excited by posthumous revelations by a real property speculator. Before dying of a serious illness, he had registered for reasons never made clear a video confession. For even more obscure reasons, the “cassette” fell into the hands of a highly placed member of the Socialist Party, Dominique Strauss-Khan, who passed it on indirectly to the press.

Even if the confessions of the speculator did not lead to any judicial sanction, they opened a Pandora’s box. The principal victim of the successive affairs was to be the Prime Minister Alain Juppé. To protect Chirac, he alone took on all the criminal offences. Putting Juppé out of the way left the way clear for Nicolas Sarkozy to take over the running of the Gaullist Party.

Sarkozy then made use of his position to force Jacques Chirac to take him back into the government, despite their mutual hatred. He was definitively to be the Minister of the Interior. What a mistake! In this post, he controlled the Préfets and the interior intelligence network which he used to put his appointees into the major branches of the administration.

He also dealt with Corsican matters. The Préfet Claude Érignac had been assassinated. Although no-one had claimed it, the murder was immediately interpreted as a challenge made by the independentists to the Republic. After a long hunt, the police managed to arrest a fleeing suspect, Yvan Colonna, the son of a Socialist Député. Without regard for the presumption of innocence, Nicolas Sarkozy announced this arrest accusing the suspect of being the assassin. This news was too good two days before a referendum being organised by the Minister of the Interior in Corsica to modify the status of the Island. However that may be, the voters rejected the Sarkozy project which, according to some, favoured Mafia interests.

Although Yvan Colonna was later found guilty, he has always claimed his innocence and no material evidence has been found against him. Strangely, the man refused to talk, preferring to be found guilty than to reveal what he knows. We here reveal that the Préfet Érignac was not killed by nationalists, but shot by the hit-man, Igor Pecatte, immediately sent off to Angola where he has been taken on by the Elf group. The motive for the crime was closely linked to the previous functions of Érignac, in charge of the African networks of Charles Pasqua at the Ministry of Cooperation. As for Yvan Colonna, he has been a personal friend of Nicolas Sarkozy for many years and their children are in friendly contact with one another.

A new affair came to light: false listings were circulating which untruthfully accused certain personalities of hiding bank accounts in Luxembourg, with Clearstream. Among the personalities defamed: Nicolas Sarkozy. He took the case to court and let it seem that his right-wing rival for the presidential election, the Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin, had organised this machination. He did not hide his intention to have him sent to prison. In reality, the false listings were put in circulation by members of the Franco-American Foundation, of which John Negroponte was the President and Frank Wisner Jr. the Director. What the Judges did not know and we reveal here was that the listings were made in London by a joint office of the CIA and the MI6, Hakluyt & Co, of which Frank Wisner Jr. is also Director. Villepin fights back against the accusations, but he is charged, forbidden to leave his home and, de facto, temporarily removed from political life. The way is open for on the right for Nicolas Sarkozy.

It remained necessary to neutralise opposition candidates. The membership dues to the Socialist Party have gone down to a symbolic level to attract new members. Suddenly thousands of young people applied for membership cards. Among them are at least ten thousand new members who are in reality members of the Trotskyite “Lambertist” Party (so called from the name of their founder Pierre Lambert). This small extreme left formation has a history of working for the CIA against the Stalinist communists during the Cold War (it was the equivalent of the SD/USA of Max Shatchman, which formed the neoconservatives in the USA). This was not the first time that the “Lambertists” had infiltrated the Socialist Party.

In particular they planted two famous CIA agents: Lionel Jospin (who became Prime Minister) and Jean-Christophe Cambadélis, the principal adviser to Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

Primaries were organised in the Socialist Party to appoint its candidate for the presidential election. Two personalities were competing: Laurent Fabius and Ségolène Royal. Only the first represented a danger for Sarkozy. Dominique Strauss-Kahn became a candidate with the task of eliminating Fabius at the last moment. This he was able to do thanks to the votes of the infiltrated “Lambertist” militants who voted not for him but for Royal. The operation was possible because Strauss-Kahn, of Moroccan Jewish origin, had been on the US payroll for many years. The French were not aware that he lectured at Stanford, where he had been taken on by the Provost of the University, Condoleezza Rice. As soon as he took office, Nicolas Sarkozy and Condoleezza Rice thanked Strauss-Kahn by having him appointed to head the International Monetary Fund.

First days at the Élysée Palace
On the evening of the second round of the presidential election, when the opinion polls announced his probable victory, Nicolas Sarkozy made a short speech to the nation from his campaign HQ. Then, contrary to custom, he did not go to celebrate with the militants of his party, but went to Fouquet’s. The famous restaurant on the Champs-Élysées, which had once been the meeting place for the “Union Corse” now belongs to the casino operator Dominique Desseigne. It was placed at the disposition of the elected President to receive his friends and principal donors to his campaign. A hundred or so guests crowded in, the richest men in France were there with the casino bosses.

Then the elected President allowed himself a few days of earned rest. Taken there in a private Falcon-900 to Malta, he rested there on the Paloma, the 65 metre yacht of his friend Vincent Bolloré, a billionaire formed at the Banque Rothschild.

Finally, Nicolas Sarkozy was invested as President of the French Republic. The first decree which he signed was not to proclaim an amnesty, but to allow casinos to be operated by his friends Desseigne et Partouche and increase the number of gambling machines.

He formed his working team and his government. With no surprise, one finds there a very worrying casino owner (Minister of Youth and Sport) and lobbyist for the casinos of his friend Desseigne (who became spokesman for the “Gaullist” Party).

Nicolas Sarkozy relied above all on four men: Claude Guéant, Secretary General of the Élysée Palace. He was the former right arm of Charles Pasqua. François Pérol, Assistant Secretary General of the Élysée. He was a managing partner of the Banque Rothschild. Jean-David Lévitte, diplomatic adviser. Son of the former Director of the Jewish Agency. French Ambassador to UNO, he was removed from his post by Chirac who considered him too close to George Bush. Alain Bauer, the man in the shadow. His name does not appear in any directory. He is in charge of the intelligence services. Grandson of the Grand Rabbi of Lyon, former Grand-Master of the Grand Orient of France (the principal Masonic obedience in France) and former number 2 of the USA National Security Agency in Europe.

Frank Wisner Jr., who had in the meantime been appointed special envoy by President Bush for the independence of Kosovo, insisted that Bernard Kouchner be appointed Minister for Foreign Affairs with a dual priority mission: The independence of Kosovo and the ending of France’s Arab policy.

Kouchner, of Baltic Jewish origin, started his career by taking part in creating a humanitarian NGO. Thanks to money from the National Endowment for Democracy, he took part in operations for Zbigniew Brzezinski in Afghanistan, alongside Osama Ben Laden and the Karzaï brothers against the Soviets. He could be found in the 90s alongside Alija Izetbegoviç in Bosnia-Herzegovina. From 1999 to 2001, he was the High Representative of UNO in Kosovo.

Under the control of the younger brother of President Hamid Karzaï, Afghanistan became the largest producer in the world of opium poppies. The juice is transformed on the spot into heroin and transported by the US Air Force to Camp Bondsteed (Kosovo). There the drug is taken over by the men of Haçim Thaçi who distribute it principally in Europe and also in the United States. The profits are used to finance the illegal operations of the CIA. Karzaï and Thaçi are long-time personal friends of Bernard Kouchner, who obviously knows nothing of their criminal activities despite the international reports which have been made on the subject.

To complete his government, Nicolas Sarkozy appoints Christine Lagarde, Minister of Economy and Finance. She had made all her career in the United States where she ran the prestigious law firm of Baker & McKenzie. Within Dick Cheney’s the Center for International & Strategic Studies, she co-chaired with Zbigniew Brzezinski a working group which supervised the privatisations in Poland. She had organised intense lobbying for Lockheed Martin against the French aircraft manufacturer Dassault.

Sarkozy with Carla Bruni

A new escapade during the summer. Nicolas, Cécilia, their joint mistress and their children were offered holidays in the USA at Wolfenboro, not far from President Bush’s property. The bill this time was paid by Robert F. Agostinelli, an Italo-New York merchant banker, a Zionist and a leading neo-conservative who gives his views in Commentary, the magazine of the American Jewish Committee.

The success of Nicolas spreads to his half-brother Pierre-Olivier. Under the Americanised name of “Oliver”, he was appointed by Frank Carlucci (who was the number 2 of the CIA after having been recruited by Frank Wisner Sr.) Director of a new investment fund of the Carlyle Group (the joint management company of the portfolios of the Bushes and the Ben Ladens). Having become the 5th deal-maker in the world, he manages the principal assets of the sovereign funds of Kuwait and Singapore.

The popularity of the President is in free-fall in the opinion polls. One of his advisers in communication, Jacques Séguéla, planned to distract the attention of the public with new “celebrity stories”. The announcement of the divorce from Cécilia was published by Libération, the newspaper of his friend Édouard de Rothschild, to cover up the demonstrators’ slogans during a day of general strikes. Going further still, the communicator organised a meeting with the singer and former model, Carla Bruni. Several days later, her affair with the President became official and the media din again covered up the political criticisms. A few weeks later still and it was Nicolas’ third marriage. This time the witnesses whom he chose were Mathilde Agostinelli (the wife of Robert) and Nicolas Bazire, former private secretary of Édouard Balladur who had become a managing partner at the Banque Rothschild.

When will the French open their eyes to see what they should do?

© Copyright 2008 by AxisofLogic.com (Translation Copyright)

This Axis of Logic translation is available for republication as long as reprints include verbatim copy of the article its entirety, respecting its integrity. Reprints must cite the author, translator and Axis of Logic as the original source including a “live link” to the article. Thank you!

President Mugabe Rejects Western Brutal Intrusion on Africa


President of Zimbabwe Robert G. Mugabe Rejects Western Brutal Intrusion on Africa

This is the speech delivered by the President of Zimbabwe Robert Mugabe at 12th Annual National People’s Conference (08 December 2011).

On behalf of our Party, the Zimbabwe African National Union – Patriotic Front, I warmly greet and welcome you all to our 12th Annual National People’s Conference which is being hosted by the Bulawayo Province as unanimously agreed by our Party. This is an annual event which we deliberately set towards the end of every year so we have an effective, decision-making mechanism for running and servicing our Party between Congresses.

And because this particular Conference takes place just ahead of an election year, it automatically assumes the status and consequence of a real Congress. Thus by way of subject matter and decisions, this whole gathering assumes the full weight of our Congress.  Such is the gravity of this two-in-one gathering.
In the same spirit, I warmly welcome delegates from within our region and beyond who have joined us as emissaries of their respective parties.  We value this show of inter-party solidarity and hope you will find our proceedings both interesting and enriching by way of showing you how we tackle challenges we face in our own situation. Again, a warm welcome to you all!
Ladies and Gentlemen, Comrade Delegates.

President Mugabe Greeting People

We meet at a time of great events and epochal changes in the world.  A time of great, epochal changes to the north of us, in the Afro-Arab World of North Africa. There we have seen momentous turbulence now collectively known as the “Arab Spring.” This wave of popular demonstrations has definitely challenged political establishments, some of which had lasted for decades. Events in Libya and to a certain extent Egypt leave us unsure of what the end in those countries will be.

Much worse, we have seen clear evidence of intolerable Western intrusion on our Continent, intrusion whose worst form was the brutal and bloody tragedy we all saw in Libya.  The Western world intervened, seemingly in the name of the United Nations. On that flimsy veneer of legitimacy, the well-developed but autocratic nation of Libya was bombed to Stone Age with Gaddafi cruelly and brutally assassinated together with his children. Today, that country is rubble, littered with ruins caused by American and Nato terrorist bombs. Lots of lives were lost, ironically under Resolution 1973 of the United Nations whose informing principle was “the responsibility to protect” civilians. Nato, that is Europe and America killed Libyan civilians ostensibly in order to protect them! History could not have moved in a more cynical way.

Against this naked intrusion, Africa was both unprepared and ill-prepared.  Africa was disunited.  The already weak continent weakened itself even further.  Whatever our stance in the African Union, we undermined ourselves by voting for war on African soil. Today, we have a broken nation, a broken people, broken lives, broken hope. If this trend persists against our own acquiescence, we face the grim prospect of broken Independence. As a liberation movement, Zanu-PF cannot be indifferent to this most inauspicious turn of history. It is a turn which challenges our sacrifices yesterday, indeed, challenges our achievements today by way of the freedom and Independence we enjoy, and hope to pass on to posterity tomorrow and forever. The events in Libya have sound grim forebodings for our continent and we have to take a stance.

Before the guns of invasion had been silenced, indeed while the blood of the Libyan people was still being drawn, Europe, led by France and Britain, were already having a revivalist mini-Berlin Conference to divide amongst themselves the spoils of that war, principally oil and reconstruction projects. This amounted to a second pillage of Libya, indeed of our Continent, to utter silence on our part as the African Union. Countries like our own Zimbabwe, which is so richly endowed with minerals, and thus so dangerously marked by global imperialism, need to remain very vigilant, always ready to sacrifice for the defence of our Independence and natural resources.

Robert Mugabe President of Zimbabwe Calls for Elections

Ordinarily, a party like Zanu-PF, born and built in circumstances of a revolution, the fact of a people’s movement must establish instant affinities between us and any such movements wherever they may be. In them, we should see ourselves vicariously. But the North African movements raise grave concerns. As already indicated, we still have to grasp their identities in the context of the African revolution which must always be anti-colonial, anti-imperialistic.  Rather, we clearly see the serious efforts deployed by the same forces of imperialism to redirect the bursting energies of a rebelling people towards self-destruction.

Another lesson for all of us is that imperialism cannot be appeased, can never be placated through any concessions or deals. It does not keep its word. Gaddafi, we are told, invested in Europe and America. He even sponsored the re-election of those who shot at him in the end.  Much worse, he agreed to be disarmed by his enemies who fawned love and affection. Our revolution must never blink.  It must remain wide awake, always vigilant and equipped for its own defence. After all, Kwame Nkrumah, the Ghanaian founder leader and father of new Africa warned us a long time ago that only a dead imperialist is a good one. We must remain strong and steadfast against Western imperialism. We cannot cut deals with it.

We are going through a war-like phase of global capitalism.  Today it is oil; tomorrow it shall be our diamonds, platinum, uranium, gold, copper, nickel, iron, manganese, chrome and all.  We have all these coveted resources, which is why there will always be attempts to challenge our sovereignty.
Whereas in the past all development aid, capital and technology came from the West, we now have a whole new world to relate to, a world with a better appreciation of our situations and aspirations.  I am happy to inform you that this alternative capital and technology is already beginning to show itself in our systems.  We need to expand that collaborative thrust, all based on equal terms and mutual advantage.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Comrade Delegates.
In my analysis of the turbulent events of North Africa, I made reference to the dangers of economically excluding the masses from mainstream economic activity. Societies that run on unevenness, run on the principle of shutting out the vast majority of people from mainstream economy, are bound to come to grief, sooner rather than later. Zanu-PF has grasped and understood this primary lesson of societal studies! Unevenness and inequalities are core causes to instability. After all, our revolution was founded on ensuring and assuring the Zimbabwean people of some place in the economic sun.

We did not go to war so the white man continues to run our affairs here. We did not lose so many lives so all those widows, grief-stricken mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, aunts and nieces would settle back to a life of want as in colonial Rhodesia. We fought a war; won that war to win total freedom, total Independence! With that victory the vote had to come. It came. With that victory, the instruments of power by way of Government had to come.  They came. With that victory, democracy had to come. It came, brought by us.  With that victory, education for all had to come. It came. With that victory, racial discrimination had to end. It ended. With that victory, social services and amenities had to reach all people in equal or at the very least comparable measure regardless of colour or creed. That, too, happened.  Yes, with that victory the land, the land, the land, itself the grievance of all grievances, had to come back to its true owners.  It did.  The land has come, never to go back under whatever circumstances.

Today I tell you that with that victory, our national economy, our natural resources have to come back to us, without any more delay! The resources must revert to us the true owners. They are God-given; the only ones we can ever have as Zimbabweans. They are finite; once scooped out, they subtract from our total stock. Ours is not to prosper children of other Nations while our own grow spectre-thin.  Ours is not to develop far away nations, while our own people are condemned to hunger, disease and indigence.  No!  No!  No!

Izvozvo taramba zvachose. Siyala! Tinoti takarwirei?  Takafirei?
Zanu-PF developed the policy of indigenisation and economic empowerment well before the Inclusive Government. It is our policy which today has taken the form of the law of the land. We conceived it, we developed it, and we pushed it through Parliament until it became law. By the same token, we are its sole defenders, against any and all odds. It goes back to the pith of our war aims, the pith of our whole struggle. It is a matter of life and death for us as an African people seeking real Independence. Let no one fool themselves into thinking we are bluffing. Let them ask the Rhodesians who will tell them Zanu-PF does not play games with matters of blood and sacrifice. This economy shall indigenise, in our lifetime!  We are the generation that has been fated by history to make that happen, fated to carve a new place of pride for the African underdog. We dare not flinch.

We have already made a beginning on this policy whose impact should be national. Zimplats pioneered implementation of a facet of this policy of many elements, pioneered modestly in my view. Let them not rest thinking they are done.

They are not, and we shall be asking them to move up, up, up until they satisfy our policy, namely that 51 percent control must rest with our people. Other nations do it; we cannot be different. Unki followed suit and like Zimplats, we will remind them more remains to be done.  In both instances, communities who house these resources have been rewarded through a community ownership scheme.  Our wish is to cover the rest of the country.

Today we still have the patience to negotiate, to sit and talk with these companies which have been exploiting our resources without putting back much into our communities.  Time shall come when we shall not have the patience to talk.  We hope it does not get to that.

We are a liberation movement.  Yesterday we did not fear to offer our own lives, however dear, to free our People.

It does not make sense that today we fear to enforce our indigenisation policy on grounds that the economy will collapse. We faced similar dire predictions during our land reform programme. We executed it regardless. Today agriculture is on the rebound, with our people in full charge. In that sub-sector, the shoots of a truly national economy are beginning to show, together with mining, agriculture is a financial carrier of the State, never mind the enormous if not insuperable difficulties which our farmers face with each season. We must never be daunted. After all Marange will always be in Zimbabwe, Unki in Zimbabwe, Zimplats in Zimbabwe, ZimAlloys in Zimbabwe. We would rather leave our resources intact than allow them to be exploited to our detriment. At 51 percent, we have been extremely generous.

Our country does not have an elected Government. I feel I am President to a political arrangement which is makeshift, undemocratic and illegitimate. The Global Political Agreement (GPA) which initially was meant to settle inter-party differences, today threatens to usurp an elementary and inalienable right of the people, that of freely choosing a Government which must run them. The people have been toppled by this thing called GPA. It was never meant to last beyond processes we all agreed were preliminary to the holding of elections. It was just an interregnum, a short transition to a more permanent political arrangement predicated on a free and fair election. But we have constitutional issues to resolve, issues which once debated by our people, drafted by our experts, would then be put back to the people through a referendum. There was a time frame to all that, time frame which has now been totally subverted in the name of budgetary constraints. Today we ask; why are our self-anointed democrats finding democracy too expensive to be an item for the budget, too costly and unimportant to be a priority? Is it because they have been in the kitchen long enough to discover its goodies, its warmth?

There have been too many shenanigans, subterfuges, wiles and tricks, all designed to stymie the wheels of democracy. We must denounce that. We must demand elections in the first half of next year, without fail. This state of so-called inclusiveness, which in reality is a state of national standstill, has not served this country well at all. True, it gave us peace, but that peace must yield a legitimate government free to pursue definite policies without hindrance. This is not so at present. So our Party needs to gear itself for elections. It needs to strengthen its structures, close ranks and pull in one direction so we secure a landslide victory in the elections which must come soon.

Lastly, we in Zanu-PF must renounce and denounce violence. We must reject violence. After all we are right. After all history is on our side. We are the only liberation movement there ever can be for Zimbabwe. We are conceivers of policies which are running the country. We have ideas of taking this country to a new pedestal of validating our people’s Independence. Everywhere else, there is clear bankruptcy, leaving us as the only real Party of ideas, programmes and courage to lead in this turbulent world, in these turbulent times. Our progressive ideas should be the sole tools of persuasion and mobilisation, never violence. Should we ever fight, it should strictly be in self-defence. Otherwise, peace, peace, perfect peace!

Long Live our Revolution!
Long Live Zimbabwe!
Long Live the People of Zimbabwe
Long Live our Freedom and Independence!
Aluta Continua!
On that note, I now have the pleasure and honour of tabling the Central Committee Report for your consideration.
I thank you.

Source: Chronicle (Zimbabwe).

Even if I got a visa for Europe…I wouldn’t go


Abdirizak Mohamed Mohamoud

Here is a typical story of tens of thousands of African refugees seeking survival and better life. It is from an Ethiopian teacher his name is “Abdirizak Mohamed Mohamoud” as it was posted on IRIN (UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs) on 22 November 2011.

Before you read the story

For all those Africans who are trapped with poverty they must realize that Western and Arab countries, including the USA and European countries are not the solution but they are behind the problems that created Africa and World poverty; corruption; and armed conflicts.

Behind every great fortune, there must be a crime, or more. Western and Arab countries devastated Africa before and they are continuing their pillage. Look at Congo; Ghana; Nigeria; Libya; Ivory Coast;…….. and all other African countries.

Why there are poverty; conflicts; and corruption? The answer is obvious. It is because Western countries on both sides of the Atlantic and Arab countries are succeeding in getting African best natural and human resources cheap while they sell their products at exorbitant prices for long time.

The mineral industry of Africa is one of the largest mineral industries in the world. Africa is the second biggest continent, with 30 million km² of land, which implies large quantities of resources. For many African countries, mineral exploration and production constitute significant parts of their economies and remain keys to future economic growth. Africa is richly endowed with mineral reserves and ranks first or second in quantity of world reserves of bauxite, cobalt, industrial diamond, phosphate rock, platinum-group metals (PGM), vermiculite, and zirconium. Gold mining is Africa’s main mining resource.

The Central African Mining and Exploration Company (CAMEC), one of Africa’s primary mining enterprises, is criticized for its unregulated environmental impact and minimal social stewardship. In the Spring of 2009, retired British cricket player Phil Edmonds’ assets were seized by the United Kingdom’s government due to CAMEC’s illicit association with self-appointed Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe. CAMEC recently sold 95.4% of its shares to the Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation. It is currently under restructuring and is no longer trading under the CAMEC brand.

African mineral reserves rank 1st or 2nd for bauxite, cobalt, diamonds, phosphate rocks, platinum-group metals (PGM), vermiculite, and zirconium. Many other minerals are also present in quantity. The 2005 share of world production from African soil is the following : bauxite 9%; aluminium 5%; chromite 44%; cobalt 57%; copper 5%; gold 21%; iron ore 4%; steel 2%; lead (Pb) 3%; manganese 39%; zinc 2%; cement 4%; natural diamond 46%; graphite 2%; phosphate rock 31%; coal 5%; mineral fuels (including coal) & petroleum 13%; uranium 16%.

Key producers as of 2005, strategic African minerals and key producers were:
Diamonds: 46% of the world, divided as: Botswana 35%; Congo (Kinshasa) 34%; South Africa 17%; Angola, 8%.
Gold: 21% of the world, divided as: South Africa 56%; Ghana, 13%; Tanzania, 10%; and Mali, 8%.
Uranium: 16% of the world, divided as: Namibia 46%; Niger 44%; South Africa less than 10%.
Bauxite (for aluminium): 9% of the world, divided as: Guinea 95%; Ghana 5%.
Steel: 2% of the world, divided as: South Africa 54%; Egypt 32%; Libya 7%; Algeria 6%.
Aluminium: 5% of the world, divided as: South Africa 48%; Mozambique 32%; Egypt 14%.
Copper (mine/refined): 5%/ of the world, divided as : Zambia 65%/77%; South Africa 15%/19% ; Congo (Kinshasa) 13%/0%; Egypt 0%/3%.
Platinum/Palladium: 62% of the world, divided as:South Africa 97%/96%.
Coal: 5% of the world, divided as: South Africa 99%

As for agricultural produce, take Ivory Coast cocoa for example and compare the prices of cocoa and those of chocolates. Or take the prices of cotton and textiles.

The same injustices apply in human resources. They get our best minds and labor and Africa gets in return the worst of their people.

A Story of An African Refugee

[Abdirizak Mohamed Mohamoud, 30, returned to his home village of Lafaisa, in the Jijiga zone of eastern Ethiopia, six months ago, after his attempt to reach Europe and a better life turned into an ordeal. He talked to IRIN, as well as a roomful of curious neighbours and friends, about his experiences as a migrant in Libya.

“I wasn’t satisfied with life here. I was a teacher, but I wasn’t earning enough to support my family. I had friends who had gone to Libya and then to Italy, but I only got as far as Libya.

“I crossed the border of Ethiopia into Sudan; then I crossed the Sahara in a lorry with 160 other people. All of the others were from Somalia – I was the only Ethiopian. One lorry broke down, then another came and took us the rest of the way.

“I paid the driver US$1,000 – money I got from all of my family and friends – but when we arrived in Libya, the driver wanted another $1,200 and held all of us hostage in his home on a big farm for two days.

“He gave me a cell phone and told me to call my family to get the money. He only got money from 10 individuals, even though he tortured us with electric shocks. I told my mother to send money but before it came, the Libyan police came and arrested all of us, including the driver.

“We were taken to a prison in Benghazi where there were about 900 Africans – Nigerians, Somalis, Eritreans and Congolese. After three months we thought we were going to die there. Some were tortured and some tried to kill themselves. We broke out by force, overwhelming the guards, and escaped, but some local people caught me and returned me to the jail. I spent one more month there before they transferred me to a Tripoli prison, where I spent two months.

“Then they transferred me again to a place called Katron, near the border with Niger, in the Sahara. I was there for a month with 320 Somali people before we escaped again. I found some people from Chad in Katron and stayed with them for 15 days and called my family to send money. My brother sent $300 to someone he knows in Tripoli, but that money paid only for me to be smuggled from Katron to Tripoli.

“I worked as a porter in Tripoli for 18 months, just to save money to get home. I couldn’t sleep at night because I was so afraid of being robbed; the only safe place to sleep was on graves. I managed to save $700 and pooled my savings with 14 friends to pay a smuggler to take us through Niger and into Chad. We left just before the uprising [in Libya] started.

“In Chad, people were dying of hunger and UNHCR [the UN Refugee Agency] refused to help us because they were busy helping the local people who were starving. We went on to Darfur in Sudan and UNHCR flew us to Khartoum and then to the Ethiopian border. I was very happy to get home after two years and two months.

“By the time I got back, one of my sisters had already left for Saudi [Arabia] to work as a housemaid. If I had got back in time, I would have told her not to go.

“I’m an example for my village – if I had succeeded, all the others would have gone. I don’t have a job now, I’m surviving by Allah, but even if I got a visa for Europe or the United States, I wouldn’t go – I’m dying here.”].

Africa is very rich if it can only stop the West and the Arabs from exploiting its resources and undervalue their prices to make themselves filthy rich and enjoy their unsustainable and immoral ways of life.

More data on the mineral resources of Africa are at these links:

Mineral industry of Africa and Economy of Africa

%d bloggers like this: