Essential The Africa the Media Doesn't Tell You About

loyola llothta

☭☭☭
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
35,064
Reputation
6,991
Daps
80,028
Reppin
BaBylon
Very good read
https://www.blackagendareport.com/us-government-turns-somalia-failed-state-steal-its-oil
US Government Turns Somalia Into Failed State to Steal Its Oil

Nick Alexandrov

24 Mar 2021



US Government Turns Somalia Into Failed State to Steal Its Oil

“Bombing Somali civilians is one of AFRICOM’s main projects,” writes Mohamed Haji Ingiriis, a young Somali historian.


“A promising new frontier for oil exploration.”

Petroleum industry analysts call Somalia “promising ,” “one of the last truly unexplored oil frontiers.” And major firms are keen to profit there. Shell and ExxonMobil, for example, paid Mogadishu $1.7 million in 2019 for 30-year rights to offshore blocks, and Somalia launched “its first offshore oil and gas exploration licensing round ” last year to attract other companies.[1]

Developments like these suggest Somalia’s business climate is improving, after decades of conflict made it an unattractive, if not unviable, investment site. The International Monetary Fund and World Bank recently heralded the country’s financial reforms, for example, citing its Petroleum Act, oil production sharing agreements, and related measures as key developments.[2]

But if Somalia is open for business, it is a victory for state violence.

Because to create a legal and political landscape in which oil firms can profit, the perpetually weak, unpopular Somali government had to fight to extend its reach beyond Mogadishu in order to secure control of new territories at the expense of Islamist militants like al-Shabaab. In this fight, the Somali government and its allies—Ethiopia and the U.S.—have brutalized the Somali public.

“One of the fastest-growing sources of oil for the American market”

Mogadishu officials, in their latest National Development Plan, explain that al-Shabaab “diminish[es] prospects for development activities.” The group has threatened oil and gas drilling projects in Somalia’s Puntland region, and, through repeated attacks, forced a change in routes for a crude oil pipeline running from Uganda to the East African coast. Disruptions like these alarm the U.S. government as well, because oil is one of Washington’s core concerns on the continent.[3]

And so it has been for decades. In May 2001, for example, a National Energy Policy document named West Africa “one of the fastest-growing sources of oil and gas for the American market,” and by mid-2007 “U.S. oil imports from Africa [had] nearly doubled ” over the preceding five years.[4]

But there were two main threats to these oil interests. One came from within Africa: Niger Delta militias, for example, were stealing $1 billion in oil each year, thereby posing “a direct threat to U.S. strategic interests in sub-Saharan Africa.”

The second threat was China. Because it requires enormous resource inputs to sustain its economic growth—it became a net oil importer in 1993—its interest in African oil increased roughly in time with Washington’s interests, alarming U.S. officials. President George W. Bush, the Department of Defense, the CIA, the U.S.-China Economic Security Review Commission, and other elite groups all warned, circa 2006, that Beijing intended to “lock up” African oil for its own use.[5]

“Because it requires enormous resource inputs to sustain its economic growth, China’s interest in African oil increasingly alarms U.S. officials.”

Facing this perceived threat, Washington resorted to its preferred diplomatic tool: the military. During the period in question, the U.S. military divided responsibilities for Africa among the European, Central, and Pacific Commands. President Bush changed that, bringing the three together under the new U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) in October 2008.[6]

Bombing Somali civilians is one of AFRICOM’s main projects. Washington began using armed drones there in June 2011, a decade after the first Predator drone, equipped with a Hellfire missile as an experiment, successfully fired on a tank at a remote Nevada test site.

Drones were strictly surveillance tools before then, but U.S. officials were quick to capitalize on their lethal potential. Legal experts, under Presidents Bush and Obama, justified execution by armed drone “as consistent and conforming to international law.”[7]

And Obama normalized their use, launching ten times as many drone strikes as his predecessor. In Somalia, these included the January 2014 strike that killed two children; the January 2015 attack on Dinsoor that killed at least four civilians; and the April 2016 bombing in Lower Juba that killed at least three more, including one woman.[8]



President Donald Trump ramped up these attacks, tripling their annual rate. His strikes were as precise as Obama’s. An armed U.S. drone hit the Farah Waeys settlement, home to “nomadic and semi-nomadic pastoralist farmers living in makeshift houses ,” in October 2017, killing two farmers.

One of them was 25; his wife was pregnant when he died. Weeks later, on November 12, the U.S. bombed farms outside the village of Darusalaam. The attack killed three men—civilians—as they slept beneath a tree. The oldest victim was 40. His “face was disfigured ” in death, “and his throat and chest were pockmarked by multiple ordnance fragments.” He had 13 children.

“Obama launched ten times as many drone strikes as his predecessor.”

In another attack, in December, one victim had his “body blown to pieces .” His corpse, in the bombing’s aftermath, lay next to his seven-year-old daughter’s. Other victims included “a 45-year-old teacher and father of 10 children ” and his 17-year-old daughter, and a 30-year-old camel herder.[9]

Trump made it easier to inflict this pain when he reclassified Somalia as an “area of active hostilities,” canceling Obama’s 2013 Presidential Policy Guidance.

In theory, that document outlined “substantive standards that must be met before lethal action may be taken.” In reality, it’s not clear these standards were at all “substantive.” Recall that Obama considered “all military-age males in a strike zone combatants,” unless evidence later emerged, after their murder, proving their innocence. Or that U.S. officials described the signals intelligence used, under Obama, to target Somali drone victims as “poor” and “limited.”[10]

And because these victims include farmers, fathers, children, and other innocents, Ingiriis argues that the chief losers of Washington’s air war “are the Somali people. The chief winners are al-Shabaab elements who are becoming more resilient.”

U.S. military analysts concur. Tunde Osazuwa, an activist and researcher with the Black Alliance for Peace, notes that the Africa Center for Strategic Studies—a Pentagon research institution—found that “militant Islamist group activity in Africa has doubled since 2012,” as AFRICOM’s presence on the continent deepened. Washington’s nominal counter-terrorism, in other words, has empowered terrorists.[11]

link:
US Government Turns Somalia Into Failed State to Steal Its Oil | Black Agenda Report
 
Last edited:

loyola llothta

☭☭☭
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
35,064
Reputation
6,991
Daps
80,028
Reppin
BaBylon
Our Man in Mogadishu

This result is unsurprising if we review the recent history of U.S.-Somalia relations, beginning with the rule of General Mohamed Siad Barre, the dictator whom the U.S. supported throughout the 1980s.

Henry Kissinger flew to Mogadishu to meet him in January 1981; Paul Manafort’s public relations team helped him burnish his public image; and President Ronald Reagan gifted $340 million in U.S. taxpayer money to his regime during 1981-1987.[12]

Barre used these funds to repress the Somali public, and his harsh rule motivated dissidents to organize, arm themselves, and attempt to overthrow him.

One opposition group, the Somali National Movement, launched a major offensive in 1988, prompting Barre to respond with—in a word—genocide.

His fighter jets leveled the city of Hargeisa in May 1989, and another attack totally destroyed another city, Burao. Hundreds of thousands fled the carnage; 200,000 died.

Washington’s support was steadfast throughout this campaign, and U.S. officials worked to silence critics, whether in Congress or independent groups like Africa Watch, who dared to challenge the wholesale slaughter of Somali civilians. Nothing could stop the U.S. government from backing its East African genocidaire.[13]

“Humanitarian” Intervention

Barre’s government collapsed when the U.S. withdrew its support in 1991, shifting its focus to the Middle East. He left a power vacuum in his wake, which guerrilla groups and warlords fought to fill.[14]

Washington intervened in this conflict in December 1992, on—U.S. officials claimed—humanitarian grounds, to alleviate drought and famine-related suffering. They soon adopted a new objective: taking down General Mohamed Farah Aideed, head of a powerful Mogadishu faction believed responsible for the June 1991 ambush and murder of 24 UN-affiliated Pakistani soldiers.[15]

But U.S. conduct gave the lie to its stated aims.

On July 12, 1993, for example, U.S. forces bombed a Mogadishu house. They claimed it was Aideed’s command center; in reality, it was full of Somali elders debating how to encourage Aideed to pursue peace.

The bombing wounded as many as 200 civilians, and killed as many as 71 people, including women and children. Months later, on September 9, U.S. forces killed 60 civilians when they fired on a crowd from a helicopter.[16]

Slaughters like these undermine the official U.S. rationale for the intervention, forcing us to find better explanations.

Historian Davis Gibbs offers a compelling one. He argues that Washington, under the cover of humanitarianism, was in Somalia “to advance the interests of a U.S. investor, Conoco”—the only U.S. oil firm left in Somalia after Barre’s overthrow. As the top World Bank petroleum engineer remarked at the time, Somali oil had “high potential,” provided the country’s citizens could “get their act together.”[17]

It would be decades before Somalia developed in line with his desires.
Link:
US Government Turns Somalia Into Failed State to Steal Its Oil | Black Agenda Report
 

loyola llothta

☭☭☭
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
35,064
Reputation
6,991
Daps
80,028
Reppin
BaBylon
Constructing the Somali State I: 1993-2005

On October 3-4, 1993, Somalis fired rocket-propelled grenades at a swarm of Black Hawk helicopters over Mogadishu. U.S. troops were on a mission to capture two of Aideed’s top lieutenants, but the grenades brought down two of the aircraft.

In the ensuing chaos, 18 U.S. soldiers were killed. Washington withdrew soon after, and the UN followed it out of the country in 1995.[18]

The decade that followed saw a series of vain attempts to establish a viable, Mogadishu-based government.

Regions like Puntland in the northeast, and Jubbaland in the south, declared themselves autonomous in 1998. And the Transitional National Government (TNG), formed in 2000 during peace talks in Djibouti, never controlled more than parts of Mogadishu before dissolving in 2003.

Its successor, the Transitional Federal Government (TFG), was at first so weak and unpopular that it could only govern from Kenya. When it moved to Somalia in June 2005, it set up operations in Baidoa—not Mogadishu—and its Parliament “met in a converted grain warehouse.”[19]

“What has happened in Mogadishu is a miracle”

As government after government tried to establish itself, other groups emerged to provide the structure and services the TNG and TFG could not.

The Islamic Courts (ICU) was the most prominent of these groups. The earliest Somali Islamic Courts, formed in Mogadishu in 1994, were “a response to the need for some means of upholding law and order.” And they succeeded in this respect, spreading to southern Mogadishu in 1998, and then unifying in 2000 to become the ICU.

That group was “genuinely popular ,” and spread beyond the capital to southern Somalia’s Lower Shabelle region.[20]

Its growing popularity and territorial coverage angered the Somali warlords. And it was amidst mounting ICU-warlord tension that several Courts members disappeared, or were assassinated, in 2005.

The Courts blamed the CIA for these attacks, and formed a military wing—al-Shabaab, or “the youth”—in response.

But these self-defense efforts only further enflamed tensions, prompting the warlords to form, in February 2006, the CIA-backed Alliance for Restoration of Peace and Counter-Terrorism.[21]

Tensions soon exploded into all-out war, with the Courts prevailing at first, securing control of Mogadishu by early June 2006. They proceeded to clean up the city and reopened its long-shuttered airport and seaport. Residents described ICU rule as “a miracle ,” and the Courts enjoyed a 95% approval rate.

This popularity allowed the ICU to extend its influence beyond the capital, and by October 2006 the group “controlled most of southern central Somalia .”[22]

These successes revealed that, for the international conferences and interim Somali regimes discussed above, the goal was not to establish effective Somali governance. Because the ICU ruled effectively, but in the wrong way: on its own terms. This was unacceptable. And Somalis would be punished as a result.

“Whole neighborhoods were shelled”

The TFG was weak, but it had powerful friends. Ethiopia gave it military support during the latter half of 2006—the time of ICU rule.

Washington had been funding and training Ethiopian troops for the better part of a decade by then, through initiatives dating back to the Clinton era. Ethiopian troops proceeded to commit human rights abuses, but U.S. support persisted.[23]

By December 2006, these troops were ready. They teamed with the TFG to launch airstrikes and a ground offensive in Somalia, quickly massacring 1,000 ICU members.

Soon they captured Mogadishu; the ICU fled the city, then the country. To consolidate their victory, Ethiopian and Somali forces shelled neighborhoods, displacing hundreds of thousands, and terrorized the public through hospital bombings, rape, murder, and torture.

African Union troops also participated in these atrocities.

The African Union Mission in Somalia, or AMISOM, began in January 2007, just after the ICU’s defeat. And their forces, mainly Ugandans and Burundians, routinely abused and raped women and assaulted civilians.

The U.S. government, though, stepped-up aid to Burundi and Uganda, and U.S. contractors—DynCorp International and Bancroft Global Development trained AMISOM troops—were complicit in these crimes.[25] The CIA ran a counterterrorism training program for Somali intelligence agents and operatives which built up an indigenous strike force that carried out snatch operations and targeted “combat” operations against al-Shabaab. The model was the Provincial Reconnaissance Units (PRU) in South Vietnam under the murderous Phoenix program .

“The sky was full of strikes”

Besides running de facto death squads, Washington also terrorized Somalis from above. Its first airstrikes date to January 2007—the twilight of the George W. Bush era—and gave aerial support to Ethiopia’s murderous intervention, targeting ICU and al-Shabaab members trying to flee the country.[26]

At the time—and until 2011—unmanned aircraft over Somalia were strictly surveillance tools.

The attack on Aden Hashi Ayro, a top ICU council member and al-Shabaab’s first leader, required a complex choreography of military surveillance and coordinated launches that set the trademark for the high-tech U.S. war in Somalia over the next decade.

First, two Air Force AC-130 gunships landed at a small Ethiopian airport on January 6, 2007. One of them took off for Somalia the next day, accompanied by a Predator drone—itself likely launched from a U.S. base in Djibouti, after which a pair of remote pilots, “most likely sitting in a trailer in Nevada ,” took control.

The Predator then traveled 500 miles south, over the eastern Ahmar Mountains in Ethiopia and the Ogaden region’s western edge, before reaching its destination: Ras Kamboni, a remote fishing village on the Somalia-Kenya border.

The Predator proceeded to use Ethiopian intelligence to track Ayro’s convoy. It locked onto the target, and then it was time to strike: the AC-130 fired, “smashing the convoy .” The attack killed up to a dozen militants, as many as eight civilians—but not Ayro. He somehow survived, but died in another U.S. missile strike in May 2008.[27]

Weeks later, U.S. Special Forces targeted Ahmed Madobe, an ICU deputy. “At around 4am we woke up to perform the dawn prayers,” Madobe later recalled, “and that’s when the planes started to hit us . The entire airspace was full of planes. There was AC-130, helicopters and fighter jets. The sky was full of strikes.” Though he survived, the other eight members of his convoy—men and women “on the run ”—were all killed. Soon after the bombing ended, “Ethiopian and U.S. forces landed by helicopter ,” taking Madobe prisoner.[28]

Other U.S. airstrikes were like those targeting Ayro and Madobe: Heavy collateral damage was routine. Yet another January 2007 bombing, on Hayo, killed as many as 31 civilians and “at least one child.” The next year, on March 3, U.S. cruise missiles hit Dhobley, a town in the Lower Juba region, killing up to six civilians.

One local elder, lucky to survive, recalled the terror: “I woke up to loud blasts and flashing lights that shook my doors and windows. Airplanes were flying at a low altitude and were firing. I ran outside and hid under trees.”

And the following May, U.S. missiles killed somewhere between five and 30 civilians in Dusa Marreb, in the Galgaduud region.

The wide range reflects Washington’s studied indifference toward its bombing victims. The local population, for whatever reason, was more invested, “counting skulls to determine the number” slain in the strike’s aftermath.[29]

“The most effective system of governance Somalia has known”

Amidst this chaos, one group affords Somalis stability. This group was once part of the Courts system—and the only element able to survive the brutal, U.S.-supported Ethiopian intervention: al-Shabaab.

After Ethiopia’s assault forced Courts members into exile, al-Shabaab sought new alliances. It forged ties with al-Qaeda in 2008, as Ethiopia’s occupation continued.

Through its opposition to Addis Ababa, and through its association with the ICU, it won support—both as the occupation dragged on, and in its aftermath.

Much as the ICU had, al-Shabaab gained control over large swathes of Somali territory, winning much of the country’s south by 2010. It used violence to establish itself, exactly as the TNG and TFG had before it.

But al-Shabaab governs through more than terror. In its jurisdictions, according to residents interviewed by BBC Africa editor Mary Harper, “[it] is present and visible in people’s lives in a way that government is not, especially in rural areas, and smaller towns and villages. For many, it is simply the best option available,” and in some respects “has created the most effective system of governance Somalia has known since its collapse into chaos and conflict began in the late 1980s.”

Analysts acknowledge, sometimes begrudgingly, the group’s successes—and, often, superiority to the government—in fundraising, financial management, tax collection, and upholding the legal system.

Think of this track record, the next time a U.S. official promises to wipe out al-Shabaab.

link:
US Government Turns Somalia Into Failed State to Steal Its Oil | Black Agenda Report
 

loyola llothta

☭☭☭
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
35,064
Reputation
6,991
Daps
80,028
Reppin
BaBylon
Constructing the Somali State: 2012-Present

When al-Shabaab outperforms the Somali government today, it is not making the TNG or TFG look bad, but the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS).

This entity took over from the TFG, after the latter’s mandate expired in August 2012. In many respects, the FGS merely seems like a rebranded TFG: a government imposed on Somalia, and one determined to expand its control through violence and abuse.

Zakariye Mohamud Timaade, formerly with Universal TV who fled the country in June 2019, told Amnesty International that “the biggest fear for me was from NISA (National Intelligence and Security Agency ) … I knew they wanted to kill me. In Mogadishu, you can hide from Al-Shabaab, but you cannot hide from NISA; they could easily pick me from my office.”

Somali government forces have been accused in recent years of killing and displacing civilians, murdering protestors, routine rape and torture. And a recent report on their sexual violence concluded that “impunity was the norm ” for them, giving little reason to hope the number of abuses will decline with time.

Until 2027

And there seems little reason to expect an AFRICOM drawdown in Somalia. Though Trump promised to “pull American forces ” from the country before he left office, and though the U.S. military claims to have followed through on that promise, there are other factors to consider.

One is the Pentagon’s ongoing presence in Kenya and Djibouti, within easy striking range of Somalia. Another is that, some two weeks after the troop withdrawal was allegedly completed, U.S. forces were back in Somalia on a training mission—a mission they announced, a year ago, that would last until 2027.

For the Somali people, this can only mean a prolonged period of suffering.

link:
US Government Turns Somalia Into Failed State to Steal Its Oil | Black Agenda Report
 

Yehuda

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2014
Messages
30,516
Reputation
10,740
Daps
123,072
Mozambique’s The Newest Front In The US’ So-Called Global War On Terror

30 MARCH 2021
By Andrew Korybko


Many observers missed the US’ designation in early March of Mozambique’s “Al Shabaab” as an ISIS-affiliated global terrorist organization and its subsequent dispatch of roughly a dozen Green Berets to the country to aid the national military in its counter-terrorist operations, but this development signals that the Southern African state has importantly become the newest front in America’s “Global War On Terror”.


The US’ newest front in its “Global War On Terror” has officially opened in the Southern African state of Mozambique following the State Department’s designation in early March of the country’s “Al Shabaab” as an ISIS-affiliated global terrorist organization and the subsequent dispatch of roughly a dozen Green Berets there to aid the national military in its counter-terrorist operations. Many observers missed these developments, perhaps because they were too busy paying attention to the latest twists and turns of what I describe as World War C, or the world’s uncoordinated attempt to contain COVID-19 which catalyzed full-spectrum paradigm-changing processes across every sphere of life. I warned last September that “Mozambique Might Require Foreign Military Assistance To Clean Up Its Hybrid War Mess” after it became clear that the country couldn’t tackle this pressing task on its own, nor were its previously reported private military contractor (PMC) partners able to sufficiently assist it to this end. That prediction ultimately came to pass in March.

American interests in Southern Africa are varied, but they share the common objective of pushing back against regional multipolar trends, particularly China’s rising influence there. In the Mozambican case, the country stands the chance of becoming one of the world’s top LNG exporters in the future should its vast northern offshore gas deposits that are uncoincidentally in close proximity to the current terrorist-afflicted zone be fully tapped. There had hitherto been some serious concerns on the US’ part that Chinese influence in Mozambique could indirectly shape the global energy industry, as well as facilitate Beijing’s efforts to more closely connect the landlocked countries beyond to its Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) through trans-Mozambican commercial corridors. These fears are now somewhat more manageable as the US expands its own influence in the country through its close military cooperation with its partner’s armed forces for the purpose of jointly defeating this newly designated ISIS affiliate.

History attests, however, that the US’ motives aren’t ever truly benign and that it always takes advantage of anti-terrorist pretexts in order to pursue ulterior objectives. The evolving anti-terrorist situation in Mozambique is no exception since it deserves mention that the earlier cited State Department designation also imposed the same label on the anti-Ugandan “Allied Democratic Forces” (ADF) that have been operating in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) for a few decades already. That group is responsible for carrying out large-scale killings and other acts of terrorism, and its pairing with Mozambique’s “Al Shabaab” as part of ISIS’ larger “Central African Province” proxy network creates the pretext for the US to turn the entire Central-Eastern-Southern African theater into the latest front of its more comprehensive anti-terrorist operations should the Pentagon have the political will to exploit the situation to this end. Once again, the true objective would be to roll back China’s rising influence in this strategic space.

To be absolutely clear, genuine terrorist groups – especially those connected to ISIS – must be thwarted at all costs lest they continue carrying out greater acts of carnage and thus catalyze an uncontrollable chain reaction of destabilization that ultimately risks turning this transregional space into a black hole of chaos similar in a sense to what previously happened in parts of the West Asia (especially along the Syrian-Iraqi border) and is currently unfolding in West Africa. That said, while anti-terrorist cooperation with the US might achieve short-term military goals for America’s partners such as Mozambique, it might eventually be against their long-term strategic interests if the US exploits its “military diplomacy” over these increasingly desperate governments to impose political strings to continued security cooperation upon which those states might soon become dependent. In a perfect world, no such fears would credibly exist, but as previously mentioned, history proves that these concerns are completely founded by established precedent.

With this in mind, the ideal solution would be if terrorist-afflicted states didn’t have to rely on the US for anti-terrorist assistance, but the reality is that they seem to have little choice. China doesn’t partake in anti-terrorist operations abroad though it does train some of its BRI partners’ military forces, presumably also sharing its own domestic anti-terrorist experiences in the process. As for Russia, it’s developing bespoke “Democratic Security” solutions (counter-Hybrid Warfare tactics and strategies) for Global South states such as the Central African Republic, the Congo Republic, and most recently Togo, but its model is still far from perfect and thus requires plenty of improvements before such services are exported more broadly. This difficult state of strategic affairs compelled Mozambique to eventually request the US’ anti-terrorist assistance as its Hybrid War mess in Cabo Delgado Province spiraled out of control over the past few years, though it remains to be seen exactly what political strings America will attach to its continued security support in this respect.

Mozambique’s The Newest Front In The US’ So-Called Global War On Terror
 

loyola llothta

☭☭☭
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
35,064
Reputation
6,991
Daps
80,028
Reppin
BaBylon
Mozambique-1024x534.jpg

29 March 2021

African Branch of ISIS Plans to Form Islamic Caliphate in Mozambique

By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida



The security situation on the African continent is close to chaos. Once again, terrorist groups advance in Mozambique and leave innocent victims, drawing the attention of international society to the structural failure in the current mechanisms to combat terrorism in Africa.



Last Wednesday, terrorists invaded the Mozambican city of Palma in a brutal attack on shops, banks, hotels, and a military base. Dozens of people died during the attack. There are hundreds of wounded, many in serious condition. According to reports by survivors, while escaping the shootings, civilians hid on a beach in the region, where a large number of decapitated bodies were spread. Official figures are still being counted.

Palma is a city located in the province of Cabo Delgado, a region with a Muslim majority. The dispute for political control of the region has been operated by several terrorist militias. These militias belong to the terrorist group Al Shabab, which is an African regional branch of ISIS. Al Shabab’s activities are all carried out under strict control, being fully coordinated according to the interests of ISIS, which is in fact the organization that controls terrorism in Mozambique and in most of Africa. With the recent attacks, Mozambique has reached the mark of more than 2,500 dead since the start of the attacks and clashes in 2017. In addition, the number of migrants is already over 70,000, due to collective fear.

However, the reasons why militias representing ISIS want to control the region are quite strategic. Palma is a city close to a large gas exploration field under the control of the French company Total. Right after the attack, Total suspended its activities indefinitely. As a result, the company’s facilities are vulnerable to occupation by terrorists, considering that government forces have been unable to contain the attacks.



Indeed, the most plausible explanation for the focus of the attacks and tensions being Palma and the entire region close to the border with Tanzania, where there are rich reserves of natural gas, is that there is an interest on the part of ISIS to control this natural resource and enjoy its technological and economic benefits.


Al Shabab has been conducting attacks with the objective of making it impossible to carry out the exploration and commercialization of the gas.

Total, which has now suspended its activities, can, at any time, give up on its projects in Mozambique if it does not receive support in security policies – something that the Mozambican government does not seem capable of doing and that the French government does not seem interested in. This will lead to the abandonment of the facilities, which could be occupied by Al Shabab in a few days, making official the control of Mozambican gas by terrorists affiliated with ISIS. This situation would be catastrophic, as it would put a large amount of material resources under the control of criminal organizations, making possible several projects that until then would have been unimaginable. After all, having an equipped army, controlling a territory and its population, and exploring and trading natural resources, terrorists will have almost all the necessary requirements to form a true country in Africa, which will serve as the basis for international terrorism.

The formation of an Islamic caliphate in Africa is not a recent project. This has always been part of the dreams of the largest terrorist groups, and many see that such a project would in fact have greater viability in the African continent than in the Middle East, mainly because it is a region with much weaker states, much more deteriorated political structures, poorly equipped armies, with little military action by world powers and with a gigantic list of natural resources far beyond oil. It is no coincidence that ISIS’ activities in Africa have been growing as this group has failed in Syria. The less space it loses in the Middle East, the more ISIS focuses on regions with less international attention.

Historically, France is the nation that is most concerned with the security of the African continent. There are several French military cooperation projects with African nations and the presence of the European country on this continent is immense. However, we can clearly see that the mechanisms used so far have not been sufficient and that Paris is no longer able to deal with the African issue. Still, amid problems with migration and concerns about the forthcoming elections, Macron does not seem willing to change his policy towards Africa. Meanwhile, Mozambique suffers from the advance of the terrorist militias, which already almost completely control Palma. Total is about to leave the country and soon its structures may be commanded by Al Shabab, which will be able to use natural gas to invest in the infrastructure of a new caliphate or to sell resources on the world illegal market. In the end, who will prevent the catastrophe of the formation of a terrorist state in Eastern Africa?

link:
African branch of ISIS plans to form Islamic caliphate in Mozambique
 

loyola llothta

☭☭☭
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
35,064
Reputation
6,991
Daps
80,028
Reppin
BaBylon
French billionaire Vincent Bolloré of @Bollore_BTL now controls Ghana's biggest port, Tema, thanks to a deal that's tilted against the West African country's interests, an investigation by @Africa_Conf. Tema is the 16th West African port Bolloré controls https://buff.ly/2NVIpfN



11:15 AM · Mar 26, 2021




A new leaked report obtained by Africa Confidential shows how French ports and media billionaire Vincent Bolloré gained control of Ghana's busiest port, at the expense of the public purse. #Ghana



How Vincent Bolloré won Ghana’s Tema port contract
theafricareport.com

9:44 AM · Mar 25, 2021

 

Premeditated

MANDE KANG
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
31,557
Reputation
2,565
Daps
92,529
Reppin
IMMIGRANT TETHERS
Mozambique-1024x534.jpg

29 March 2021

African Branch of ISIS Plans to Form Islamic Caliphate in Mozambique

By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida



The security situation on the African continent is close to chaos. Once again, terrorist groups advance in Mozambique and leave innocent victims, drawing the attention of international society to the structural failure in the current mechanisms to combat terrorism in Africa.





link:
African branch of ISIS plans to form Islamic caliphate in Mozambique
i'm still confused about how there are islamic jihadist in Mozambique of all places. A Christian Portuguese colony at that. How the fukk they form there but not a place with larger muslim population. TZ and Kenya both have higher islamic followers
 

loyola llothta

☭☭☭
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
35,064
Reputation
6,991
Daps
80,028
Reppin
BaBylon
Top