Skip to content or view mobile version

Home | Mobile | Editorial | Mission | Privacy | About | Contact | Help | Security | Support

A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.

Hidden Article

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

One year on: Why Barack Obama has failed Afrika

Kwame Osei | 25.01.2010 14:26 | Analysis | Education

When Barack Obama was elected US president a year ago many people of Afrikan descent naively and gulliably thought that given his Afrikan ancestry he would help Afrika.

This article is to inform Afrikans everywhere that Obama WILL do nothing for Afrika and Afrika and Afrikans must not look to Obama.

One year ago "history" was made when the 44th president of the United States was sworn in. That president happened to be the "first" Afrikan American to be given the realms of the most powerful man in the world.

However unlike the vast majority of Afrikans on the continent and Afrikans in the Diaspora, I was not jumping up and down when Barack Hussein Obama was sworn in as US president.

Many Afrikans both at home and abroad were of the wrong and naive impression that Obama's secession to the White House would mean that Afrika's time had come and that Obama with his Afrikan ancestry would be more of a servant to Afrika then any other US president.

However what many Ghanaians and Afrikans as a whole are not ware of is that first and foremost Barack Hussein Obama is a freemason and given the importance of freemasonry in America it is for readers to understand that if Obama had not been a freemason he would have NEVER been president.
Secondly the readers have to be aware that every American president since John Fitzgerald Kennedy have ALL been freemasons including William Jefferson Clinton, George Herbert Walker Bush and his son George Walker Bush.

Again what readers have to understand is that Barack Obama is an agent of the secret world government called the Illuminati who actually, call the shots and tell American presidents what policies to implement and how to implement them. And if you are familiar with US internal politics one would be aware that it is the illuminati who actually select every American president before the public votes for that person.

Suffice to say that the illuminati is made up of America’s elite families who own/control some of the world's most powerful multi-national companies and when elected every American president has to protect the interest of the elite by promoting the interest of corporate America and these multi-national companies.

Thirdly and more importantly Obama via his White/European mother has royal American aristocracy lineage/blood and this is very important when wanting to become US president and again if Obama were NOT from this royal American lineage, he would HAVE NOT become US president.

So given the above how Obama is going to help Afrika - In actual fact when Obama was running for president not once did he mention any fresh and innovative policy/initiative towards Afrika. And more cogently when he ran for president Obama did not mention how he would help Afrikan-Americans who are the most impoverished racial group in America with huge problems relating to incarceration, crime, health, unemployment, employment, education and housing amongst many others.

Therefore if after his first year Obama's policies have failed the vast majority of 40 million Afrikan Americans who incidentally voted in huge numbers for him, what CAUSE IS THERE TO ASSUME THAT HE WILL HELP one billion Afrikans?

As we have seen during the recent "climate change" talks Obama's main policy objective is to secure the interest s of America’s corporate elite who enstooled him in the first place. The so-called deal at the "climate change" talks was nothing more than business as usual for America and the West who refuse to acknowledge their immense cause of "climate change" and take responsibility for their actions leaving Afrika vulnerable to its effects.

It is this that I lay claim to my premise that Obama has failed Afrika in his first year and there is nothing to suggest that the rest of his term will be any better for Afrika. This special feature seeks to point out to the readership where Obama has failed Afrika.

First Obama has failed Afrika in the area of trade. Afrika has only around 4% of world trade which is absolutely horrendous given that Afrika has about 70% of the world's resources. Given that America has enormous influence in the World Trade Organization., you would think that Obama would want to help Afrika in this vital area if Afrika is going to escape the chains of economic enslavement.

Wrong! - Instead America under Obama has adopted a protectionist policy which as a result, many Afrikan producers of goods and services are excluded from the lucrative American market. This despite the AGOA - Afrikan Growth and Opportunities Act, that seeks to give Afrikan countries "favourable" conditions to enter the lucrative American market.

However what the readers’ must be aware of is that some of these "conditions" are very sinister - for example if an Afrikan country is to access the American market, they must liberalize their economy and allow western multi-national companies in particular American multi-national companies easy access to their markets, including enjoying tax holidays.

The stark reality is that only a handful of Afrikan countries have had access to the American market and ALL have had to pay heavy prices for doing so - please read confessions of an economic hitman, John Perkins and Profiting from poverty, article from New African Magazine, 1 November 2007 to learn more about this insidious form of economic enslavement.

This is an excerpt from this article:

The UN estimates that unfair trade rules deny poor Afrikan countries $700bn every year, and 70% of that trade is controlled by multinational corporations.

As the British journalist George Monbiot puts it: "Debt, unfair terms of trade and poverty are not causes of Africa's problems but symptoms. The cause is power: the ability of the G8 nations and their corporations to run other people's lives."

It is well documented how International Financial Institutions (IFIs) were set up to provide financing to governments and private companies for social and human development, physical infrastructure projects, trade, investment, establishing new businesses, services delivery, etc. However, today many of these IFIs have taken on the mantle of main agents of economic globalization.

For example, although the core IFIs--also called multilateral development banks, i.e., World Bank, IMF and regional development banks such as the African Development Bank (ADB)--ostensibly provide loans, grants and technical support to developing countries for the purposes of national development and poverty reduction, significant portions of their operations are directed towards boosting the private sector.

According to writer Tony Iltis: "The lies and distortions of the power brokers ... [and how] they allow multinationals to exploit human and natural resources takes away freedom from people. D R Congo is one of the richest countries in the world in terms of natural resources, yet one of the poorest in terms of its population. This is because 32 Western corporations mainly American own the country's mineral wealth."

In a recent article published in Australia, Iltis revealed the length to which these corporations would go to protect their freedom of ownership. "This was demonstrated by an Australian company in the village of Kilwa, DR Congo in October 2004," he wrote. "To protect its silver and copper mines from impoverished locals, the company employed Congolese soldiers, transported in company vehicles, who killed and raped locals, leaving many dead."


The next area where Obama has failed Afrika is in the field of Agriculture. Agriculture is the mainstay of the Afrikan economy, in that 70% of Afrika’s population lives in rural communities where agriculture is the biggest employer and safety net for many Afrikan families.

However agriculture in Afrika is beginning to fall victim to the new economic enslavement of which America is at the forefront. This is because the West and America in particular subsidies their farmers to the hilt. In America farmers like the rice and cotton farmers are subsidised billions of dollars’ year.

Let us use the example of rice that is the staple food of many Ghanaians.

The American government subsidies the rice farmers in America to the tune of billions of dollars a year. However as a result of unfair trade rules and regulations and conditions tied to receiving so-called aid or financial assistance, Afrikan countries like Ghana are not allowed to subsidies their farmers.

Rice is a heavily subsidized business in the U.S. Rice subsidies in the U.S. totaled $11 billion from 1995 to 2006. One producer alone, Riceland Foods Inc. of Stuttgart, Arkansas, received over $500 million dollars in rice subsidies between 1995 and 2006.

The Cato Institute recently reported that rice is one of the most heavily supported commodities in the U.S. -- with three different subsidies together averaging over $1 billion a year since 1998 and projected to average over $700 million a year through 2015.

What the above scenario highlights is that it creates an uneven playing field as a result of which cheap subsidized American rice floods the Ghanaian/Afrikan market. Ghana alone imports around $500 million worth of rice a year, most of which comes from America. Because this rice is heavily subsides, it is relatively cheap compared to the local rice and because of the trendy advertising that goes along with it, Ghanaians prefer to patronize foreign imported rice rather than buy the local rice which in actual fact is much more healthier than the imported rice much of which is bleached with harmful chemicals and stripped of its nutritional value.

As a result of Ghanaians patronizing cheap foreign rice, the local rice farmer loses valuable income which that farmer could have used to send his/her children to school, pay health care bills and pay other expenses. The government also misses out because they lose out on vital revenue since Ghanaians are not buying local rice. This revenue could be used for schools, roads, hospitals, railways, improvement in electricity and water supply and other things to improve the Ghanaian quality of life.

However one of the most damaging effects of Ghanaians patronizing foreign and American rice is that it totally destroys the Ghanaian rice farmer, the land and even creates food shortages.

An example of how American rice has destroyed livelihoods in Black countries is in Haiti. Haiti is a country in the Caribbean whose population is vastly made from the descendants of enslaved Afrikans.

Thirty years ago, Haiti grew all the rice it needed. What happened?

In 1986, after the expulsion of Haitian dictator Jean Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier the International Monetary Fund (IMF) loaned Haiti $24.6 million in desperately needed funds (Baby Doc had raided the treasury on the way out).

But, in order to get the IMF loan, Haiti was required to reduce tariff protections for their Haitian rice and other agricultural products and some industries to open up the country’s markets to competition from outside countries. The U.S. has by far the largest voice in decisions of the IMF.

Doctor Paul Farmer was in Haiti then and saw what happened. “Within less than two years, it became impossible for Haitian farmers to compete with what they called ‘Miami rice.’ The whole local rice market in Haiti fell apart as cheap, U.S. subsidized rice, some of it in the form of ‘food aid,’ flooded the market. There was violence, ‘rice wars,’ and lives were lost.”


“American rice invaded the country,” recalled Charles Suffrard, a leading rice grower in Haiti in an interview with the Washington Post in 2000. By 1987 and 1988, there was so much rice coming into the country that many stopped working the land.

Fr. Gerard Jean-Juste, a Haitian priest who has been the pastor at St. Claire and an outspoken human rights advocate, agrees. “In the 1980s, imported rice poured into Haiti, below the cost of what our farmers could produce it. Farmers lost their businesses. People from the countryside started losing their jobs and moving to the cities. After a few years of cheap imported rice, local production went way down.”

So rather than cut US rice and other food subsides that would in itself benefit Afrika, Obama is now saying that the only way to deal with the food shortages in Ghana and other Afrikan nations is to introduce GM (genetically modified) food.

By the way GM Food is extremely dangerous because what the West and their scientists are not telling Afrikans is that GM foods contain poisonous organisms that are dangerous to the body's immune system as they are made with a cross-breed of different species rather than made the organic and natural way. GM foods are even more deadly than food that is made using pesticides, DDT and other harmful chemicals.

Europe as a result of these health concerns has already banned the use of GM foods. In the UK the heir to the British throne His Majesty Prince Charles has been a vehement critic of GM foods citing that the science behind it is extremely alarming. Prince Charles has a team of advisors and scientists who are extremely knowledgeable on this issue.

Furthermore Prince Charles, aware of the dangers GM food possess, has his own Organic farm in Gloucestershire, where he grows Organic food in accordance with nature and free from dangerous chemicals like pesticides, DDT, fertilizers and so forth. Please read the following article by His Royal Highness from last week's Daily Mail - a UK based paper.

Prince Charles Challenges British Government To Be Scientific Regarding Safety

Prince Charles has launched a scathing attack on genetically-modified products, and the UK Government has responded with annoyance and propaganda rather than science.

In an article in last week's Daily Mail, Prince Charles poses a series of questions about the safety of GM foods and attacked the lack of independent scientific research. And he rejects the hype that GM crops represent a solution to feeding the world's growing population as a case of "emotional blackmail".

Asserting that the argument sounded ``suspiciously like emotional blackmail,'' the prince said the countries that could be expected to benefit took a different view. Representatives of 20 African countries, including Ethiopia, had published a statement denying that gene technologies would help farmers to produce the food they needed.

``They think it will destroy the diversity, the local knowledge and the sustainable agricultural systems . . . and undermine our capacity to feed ourselves,'' said the prince.

Deep divisions emerged within the British Government following the Prince's challenge. Although the prime minister's spokesman refused to be drawn into a direct clash with the prince, it was clear there is considerable anger in Whitehall at the way he has reignited the debate in Britain on the issue. The prince's intervention has delivered a body blow to the government's attempts to reassure corporations that their people could be made to accept unproven genetically modified crops as safe.

Here are the ten important unanswered questions posed by the Prince:

1. Do we need GM food in this country?

The Prince: The benefits, such as there are seem to be limited to the people who own the technology and the people who farm on an industrialized scale.

2. Is GM food safe for us to eat?

The Prince: Only independent scientific research, over a long period, can provide the final answer.

3. Why are the final rules for approving GM foods so much less stringent than those for new medicines produced using the same technology?

The Prince: Before drugs are released on to the market they have to undergo the most rigorous testing...Surely it is equally important that [GM foods] will do us no harm.

4. How much do we really know about the environmental consequences of GM crops?

The Prince: Lab tests showing that pollen from GM maize in the United States caused damage to the caterpillars of Monarch butterflies provide the latest cause for concern. More alarmingly, this GM maize is not under test.

5. Is it sensible to plant test crops without strict regulations in place?

The Prince: Such crops are being planted in this country now - under a voluntary code of practice. But English Nature has argued that enforceable regulations should be in place first.

6. How will consumers be able to exercise genuine choice?
The Prince: Labelling schemes clearly have a role to play, but if conventional and organic crops are contaminated by GM crops, people who wish to avoid GM food products will be denied choice.

7. If something goes wrong with a GM crop, who will be held responsible?

The Prince: It is important that we know precisely who is going to be legally liable to pay for any damage - whether it be to human health, the environment or both.

8. Are GM crops really the only way to feed the world's growing population?

The Prince: This argument sounds suspiciously like emotional blackmail to me.

9. What effect will GM crops have on the people of world's poorest countries?

The Prince: Where people are starving, lack of food is rarely the underlying cause. The need is to create sustainable livelihoods for everyone. Will GM crops really help or will they make the problems worse?

10. What sort of world do we want to live in?

The Prince: Are we going to allow the industrialization of Life itself, redesigning the natural world for the sake of convenience? Or should we be adopting a gentler, more considered approach, seeking always to work with the grain of nature?

The above article from the heir to the British throne poses some very serious questions that Afrikans should be aware of before we even contemplate the idea of consuming such dangerous food and IF Obama were a true son of Afrika, what son would feed his children with dangerous food?

Ironically, Obama has commissioned a company called Monsanto to look into the possibility of cultivating GM Food on a large scale in Afrika. By the way Monsanto is a biotech company owned by the American elite that I was referring to earlier on who are a part of the secret world government, the illuminati.

Monsanto and their monopoly on the GM foods market is very dangerous and they are aggressively targeting the Afrikan market. For those who want to know more about the dangerous Monsanto Company and the evils of GM food, I recommend you watch the French documentary, called “The world according to Monsanto” directed by independent filmmaker Marie-Monique Robin, which paints a grim picture of a company with a long track record of environmental crimes and health scandals.

After seeing “The world according to Monsanto”, Greenpeace International campaigner Geert Ritsema said:
“Mrs. Robin should be congratulated for revealing the sinister practices of the world’s leading producer of genetically engineered seeds. Her film is alarming and should be a call to action for everybody who cares about the quality of our food and a healthy future for our planet.”

The next area where Obama has failed Afrika is the sales of arms. The sale of arms to Afrika has been a MAJOR reason for the continent's instability and lack of economic progress and development - because you develop in peace not war. American companies have in the past been involved in selling huge amounts of arms that have been used in some of the continent’s most damaging wars from Liberia where Charles Taylor was backed by the CIA through to Sierra Leone, Angola, Somalia and D R Congo. Arms sales to Afrika under Obama have increased as the following highlights:

FOREIGN MILITARY FINANCING

The Obama administration proposes maintaining or significantly increasing funding for the Foreign Military Financing programme, which provides loans for the sale of weaponry and other military equipment to a number of African countries. The administration's request raises the total funding for arms sales to Africa from $8.3 million in financial year (FY) 2009 to $25.6 million in FY 2010. The new funding includes funding for arms sales to Chad ($500,000), the Democratic Republic of Congo ($2.5 million), Djibouti ($2.5 million), Ethiopia ($3 million), Kenya ($1 million), Liberia ($9 million), Nigeria ($1.4 million), South Africa ($800,000) and African regional programmes ($2.8 million).

INTERNATIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION AND TRAINING

The Obama administration proposes small increases in the International Military Education and Training (IMET) programmes for African counties, raising the total funding for this programme from $13.8 million in FY 2009 to $16 million in FY 2010. Significant increases in funding are requested for Chad ($400,000), Djibouti ($350,000), Ethiopia ($775,000), Ghana ($850,000), Kenya ($1,050,000), Liberia ($525,000), Mali ($350,000), Niger ($250,000), Nigeria ($1,100,000), Rwanda ($500,000), Senegal ($1,100,000), South Africa ($900,000) and Uganda ($550,000). The United States will continue its major IMET programme in the Democratic Republic of Congo ($500,000), and the Obama administration is proposing to start new IMET programmes in Equatorial Guinea ($40,000), Somalia ($40,000) and Zimbabwe ($40,000).

Given the above you would have thought that instead of so-called military aid and selling arms to Afrika that are used to fight America's Afrikan wars by proxy as is what is going on right now in D R Congo to protect America's vast commercial interest, Obama would be helping Afrika out of the difficulties it faces as a result of the ongoing global financial crisis but no, Obama is sending arms and military so-called training to Afrika – by the way most of the arms companies in America are owned the elite families who are part of the illuminati I was referring to earlier

Another issue where Obama has failed Afrika is that of aid. We all remember the massive pledges that followed the G8 summit in Gleneagles , Scotland in 2005 when former British Prime Minister Tony Bliar touted Afrika as his main cause by stating that the leaders of the G8 had promised Afrika $US50Bn in aid money.

However the reality is that only a tiny percentage of this money has materialized of which is recycled money used for other projects in Afrika.
Given the financial crisis that is engulfing the west, aid payment to Afrika in the years ahead will actually decrease rather than the hype that comes from the west that they have increased aid to Afrika.
In actual fact US aid under Obama will decrease as he grapples with a record budget deficit and record unemployment in the US.

In actual fact, despite the protestations from western governments, their media, their celebrities and their NGO's the stark reality is that aid to Afrika has NEVER worked, IS NOT designed to work and WILL NEVER WORK to help lift Afrika out of poverty but rather the opposite. For more insight please read the following preamble to the critically acclaimed book, DEAD AID by Afrikan writer Dambisa Moyo

In the past fifty years, more than $1 trillion in development-related aid has been transferred from rich countries to Africa. Has this assistance improved the lives of Africans? No. In fact, across the continent, the recipients of this aid are not better off as a result of it, but worse—much worse
.
In Dead Aid, Dambisa Moyo describes the state of postwar development policy in Africa today and unflinchingly confronts one of the greatest myths of our time: that billions of dollars in aid sent from wealthy countries to developing African nations has helped to reduce poverty and increase growth.

In fact, poverty levels continue to escalate and growth rates have steadily declined—and millions continue to suffer. Provocatively drawing a sharp contrast between African countries that have rejected the aid route and prospered and others that have become aid-dependent and seen poverty increase, Moyo illuminates the way in which overreliance on aid has trapped African nations in a vicious circle of aid dependency, corruption, market distortion, and further poverty, leaving them with nothing but the “need” for more aid.

Debunking the current model of international aid promoted by both Hollywood celebrities and policy makers, Moyo offers a bold new road map for financing development of the world’s poorest countries that guarantees economic growth and a significant decline in poverty—without reliance on foreign aid or aid-related assistance.

Dead Aid is an unsettling yet optimistic work, a powerful challenge to the assumptions and arguments that support a profoundly misguided development policy in Africa. And it is a clarion call to a new, more hopeful vision of how to address the desperate poverty that plagues millions.

Add to this there is a quote in the British Magazine, The new Statesman from respected White/European journalist, John Pilger who stated that at present, for every $1 of "aid" to Africa, $30 are taken out by western banks, institutions and governments, and that does not include the repatriated profit of multi-national corporations.


The last area which Obama has failed Afrika is US Foreign policy towards Afrika. The centerpiece of this policy is AFRICOM. AFRICOM is an initiative of the neo-cons in the former Bush administration and is a policy that Obama is continuing with keen interest. Why? Well The Bush Administration knew before 9/11 that their major commodity Oil would be difficult to get, given the precarious nature of their once safe haven the “middle east” and that they now saw the West Afrika sub-region as a vital source of their supply for oil.
US Intelligence review informed the Bush Administration that Ghana , Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe, and Cameroun – all in West Afrika held some of the world’s largest untapped reserves of oil. Therefore the US had to protect its commercial interest in the West Afrika sub-region and hence the concept of AFRICOM that is a dangerous military concept in both delivery and implementation.
AFRICOM was launched in September 2008 but not on the Afrikan continent has the Bush Administration had hoped but in its military base in Germany and the Senate recently confirmed Gen. William "Kip" Ward, an Afrikan-American as its first commander.

General Ward told the Senate Armed Services Committee that AFRICOM would first seek "African solutions to African problems." His testimony made AFRICOM sound like a magnanimous effort for the good of the African people. In truth AFRICOM is a dangerous continuation of US military expansion around the globe that Obama is determined to pursue.
Such foreign-policy priorities, as well as the use of weapons of war to combat terrorist threats on the African continent, will not achieve national security. AFRICOM will only inflame threats against the United States, make Africa even more dependent on external powers and delay responsible African solutions to continental security issues.

The US militarization of Africa is further rationalized by Obama’s claims that AFRICOM "will enhance our efforts to bring peace and security to the people of Africa" and promote the "goals of development, health, education, democracy and economic growth." Yet the Obama administration fails to mention that securing and controlling African wealth and natural resources are key to US trade interests, which face growing competition from China.
American Transnational corporations rely on Africa for petroleum, uranium and diamonds--to name some of the continent's bounty. West Africa currently provides 15 percent of crude oil imports to the United States, and that figure is expected to rise to 30 percent by 2015.

Policy-makers seem to have forgotten the legacy of US intervention in Africa. During the cold war, African nations were used as pawns in postcolonial proxy wars, an experience that had a devastating impact on African democracy, peace and development. In the past Washington has aided reactionary African factions that have carried out atrocities against civilians. An increased US military presence in Africa will likely follow this pattern of extracting resources while aiding factions in some of their bloodiest conflicts, thus further destabilizing the region.

Misguided unilateral US military policy to "bring peace and security to the people of Africa" has, in fact, led to inflamed local conflicts, destabilization of entire regions, billions of wasted dollars and the unnecessary deaths of US soldiers. The US bombing of Somalia in January--an attempt to eradicate alleged Islamic extremists in the Horn of Africa--resulted in the mass killing of civilians and the forced exodus of refugees into neighboring nations. What evidence suggests AFRICOM will be an exception?

Even as this article is being written my intelligence sources in Germany reliably inform me that the powers that be are regularly navigating and surveilling the West Afrikan coastline and monitoring closely activity in the area.

Perhaps the most insidious and dangerous aspect of American foreign policy in Afrika that has materialized is the tragedy that is the D R Congo. President Eisenhower once said that ' he who controls the Congo controls Afrika'. This is because the D R Congo is the minerally richest country in the World containing some of the most precious mineral resources that are key for America’s and her western cousins’ economic and industrial survival.
Such minerals include Gold, Grade A diamonds, manganese, bauxite, tin, copper, platinum, cobalt (for jet engines and aircraft), colthan (for mobile phones, computers, lap taps, fridges, air-conditions) steel, uranium (for nuclear energy) and many many precious mineral resources.
As a result of the so-called military aid and arms sales to Afrika, America’s allies in the Region namely Rwanda and Uganda have been involved in a proxy war in Eastern Congo that has seen millions killed, made homeless, women raped, children made orphans and more cogently seen the looting of Congo’s rich resources by proxy to American and Western multi-national companies – all because of American Imperialism that Obama is destined to continue.

The last area in this policy towards Afrika where Obama has failed is that of Zimbabwe.

The struggle for Zimbabwe

Today we see Zimbabwe being attacked by US and British media terrorism. Their attack is under the guise of bringing “democracy” to Zimbabwe, led by US imperialist fronts like, the National Endowment for Democracy and the British Westminster, friends of Zimbabwe. In reality what they mean by democracy is “bourgeois democracy.” According the great late Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, under bourgeois democracy, “freedom is confined to the political sphere, and has no relevance to economic matters.”

Many Africans have been deceived by the imperialist doctrine of bourgeois democracy, as a result of constant imperialist propaganda. Lenin said that dialectics show “…under what conditions [opposites] are identical, transforming themselves into one another…” This can be applied to Zimbabwe’s elections to determine what conditions take free and fair into the category of un-free and un-fair. The American led imperialist assault on Zimbabwe’s economy, using US/EU sanctions, has created mass poverty and hunger within Zimbabwe. The American led imperialists have invested massive amounts of capital to develop a surrogate force within Zimbabwe, the MDC.

For those readers who do not know the MDC is a "political party" that was set up, funded and instituted by the West to serve their needs in Zimbabwe under the guise of democracy using their stooge Morgan Tsvangarai.

American and western imperialism and its surrogate, the MDC, have harmonized their propaganda to blame Zanu-PF for the hunger and poverty created by the MDC/US/EU sanctions; all financed by the US/EU capitalist class. They have also conveyed to the people that voting for MDC, the puppet of the US/EU, is the key to stopping the economic assault, and the resultant hunger and poverty.
The West controls the productive forces in Zimbabwe (mines, banks, industries) and
Zanu-PF is making a move to control those very forces with the Afrikanization and empowerment policies. Under these circumstances, American/Western aggression and infiltration, economic sanctions, media terrorism, and antagonism over the productive forces, Zimbabwe elections can not be considered free and fair. In reality Zimbabwe represents the front line in Africa’s just war against US led neo-colonialism.

US imperialism is playing a vicious game on Africa. They use military aggression and CIA overthrows to gain control of Africa’s resources. They put a vassal class in power over Africa’s people to facilitate the expropriation of Africa’s resources and the exploitation of Africa’s labor.
They confine African political activity to voting on who will facilitate our exploitation for American Imperialism. They attack revolutionary and progressive forces, using bourgeois democracy and terrorism, propaganda, to establish moral authority. They disguise American imperialist puppets as independent leaders.

Why is the US, EU and Britain interested in Zimbabwe?
Zimbabwe is endowed with Uranium, Platinum, Chrome, Gold, Diamonds, Methane Gas, Coal, asbestos, copper, nickel, iron ore, tobacco, and cotton. US imperialism sees Tsvangarai’s MDC as the weapon to stop the people of Zimbabwe’s advance on these valuable resources.

Morgan and the MDC are tools for American/Western robbery in Zimbabwe and this is why the US and UK are hell bent on the destruction of the unity government (America and the west never wanted the unity government in the first place) of Zimbabwe and the real agenda of the US under the Bush administration and now Obama is regime change with Mugabe completely out of the frame. They will not succeed in their nefarious plans.


Mugabe strikes imperialism

President Mugabe has seized Afrikan land from under a European Settler Colonial State for the first time in history. This is unprecedented and one of the greatest accomplishments in modern history. It also exposes the hypocrisy of settler colonial occupations in Namibia, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, North America, and Israel, posturing as champions of democracy. Native Americans in the US and Aborigines in Australia clearly have no vote on how they see fit to control their own land and resources, which is real democracy.

President Mugabe has also instituted Afrikanization and economic empowerment policies in Zimbabwe (something the west especially America and Britain do not like). Policies which are putting the Afrikan people of Zimbabwe in economic control of Zimbabwe’s means of producing wealth and economy by requiring by law that indigenous Zimbabweans own at least 51% of the key resources, banks, and industries in Zimbabwe. How would the imperialist react if this was done in neo-colonial Ghana today?

In other words, he is standing up to US Neo-Colonialism and saying NO to the status quo. This is a great example for all of Africa and the world.

So given a thorough and critical analysis of the above it is fair to say that President Barack Hussein Obama has failed Afrika and failed miserably. If during his next few years as president, Obama fails to take the bull by the horn and engage in policies that will truly emancipate Afrika from the scourge and dehumanizing effects of US and Western imperialism, the Obama will not have failed this generation of Afrikans who had high expectations of him, but also future generations of Afrikans and history WILL NEVER forgive Obama for squandering an historic duty and opportunity to engage with Afrika in true Freedom, Justice and Equality.

Kwame Osei
- e-mail: nanaoseikwame@hotmail.com

Comments

Upcoming Coverage
View and post events
Upcoming Events UK
24th October, London: 2015 London Anarchist Bookfair
2nd - 8th November: Wrexham, Wales, UK & Everywhere: Week of Action Against the North Wales Prison & the Prison Industrial Complex. Cymraeg: Wythnos o Weithredu yn Erbyn Carchar Gogledd Cymru

Ongoing UK
Every Tuesday 6pm-8pm, Yorkshire: Demo/vigil at NSA/NRO Menwith Hill US Spy Base More info: CAAB.

Every Tuesday, UK & worldwide: Counter Terror Tuesdays. Call the US Embassy nearest to you to protest Obama's Terror Tuesdays. More info here

Every day, London: Vigil for Julian Assange outside Ecuadorian Embassy

Parliament Sq Protest: see topic page
Ongoing Global
Rossport, Ireland: see topic page
Israel-Palestine: Israel Indymedia | Palestine Indymedia
Oaxaca: Chiapas Indymedia
Regions
All Regions
Birmingham
Cambridge
Liverpool
London
Oxford
Sheffield
South Coast
Wales
World
Other Local IMCs
Bristol/South West
Nottingham
Scotland
Social Media
You can follow @ukindymedia on indy.im and Twitter. We are working on a Twitter policy. We do not use Facebook, and advise you not to either.
Support Us
We need help paying the bills for hosting this site, please consider supporting us financially.
Other Media Projects
Schnews
Dissident Island Radio
Corporate Watch
Media Lens
VisionOnTV
Earth First! Action Update
Earth First! Action Reports
Topics
All Topics
Afghanistan
Analysis
Animal Liberation
Anti-Nuclear
Anti-militarism
Anti-racism
Bio-technology
Climate Chaos
Culture
Ecology
Education
Energy Crisis
Fracking
Free Spaces
Gender
Globalisation
Health
History
Indymedia
Iraq
Migration
Ocean Defence
Other Press
Palestine
Policing
Public sector cuts
Repression
Social Struggles
Technology
Terror War
Workers' Movements
Zapatista
Major Reports
NATO 2014
G8 2013
Workfare
2011 Census Resistance
Occupy Everywhere
August Riots
Dale Farm
J30 Strike
Flotilla to Gaza
Mayday 2010
Tar Sands
G20 London Summit
University Occupations for Gaza
Guantanamo
Indymedia Server Seizure
COP15 Climate Summit 2009
Carmel Agrexco
G8 Japan 2008
SHAC
Stop Sequani
Stop RWB
Climate Camp 2008
Oaxaca Uprising
Rossport Solidarity
Smash EDO
SOCPA
Past Major Reports
Encrypted Page
You are viewing this page using an encrypted connection. If you bookmark this page or send its address in an email you might want to use the un-encrypted address of this page.
If you recieved a warning about an untrusted root certificate please install the CAcert root certificate, for more information see the security page.

Global IMC Network


www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa

Europe
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
brussels
bulgaria
calabria
croatia
cyprus
emilia-romagna
estrecho / madiaq
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
liguria
lille
linksunten
lombardia
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
napoli
netherlands
northern england
nottingham imc
paris/île-de-france
patras
piemonte
poland
portugal
roma
romania
russia
sardegna
scotland
sverige
switzerland
torun
toscana
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
chiapas
chile
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso
venezuela

Oceania
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india


United States
arizona
arkansas
asheville
atlanta
Austin
binghamton
boston
buffalo
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
dc
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
sarasota
seattle
tampa bay
united states
urbana-champaign
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
Armenia
Beirut
Israel
Palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech