I support a genuine war on terror. However, I am quite sceptical when it comes to ‘fighting terror’ in an African country that until recently suddenly discovered oil in commercial quantities. Mark Kersten from Justice in Conflict says Uganda’s recently-discovered oil reserves, which “may produce between 2.5 billion to 6 billion barrels of oil. This oil is suddenly directly linked to the country’s security”, (cited by RT). Of course we understand that the US has never intervened in a country where there is no economic or military benefit.
A video interview which is said to have been conducted in 2006 with the captioned “Joseph Kony – The Interview” which is posted on [http://www.break.com/index/
the narrator made some interesting statements that must be examined carefully: “As we walked through the bush, I was hoping that I was going to meet Joseph Kony, the man who has eluded the Ugandan government for 20 years. As we ate together, Africa’s most wanted man whose never been interviewed by a journalist seemed guilt-free more interested in the records of other criminals”, – the narrator who appeared to be the same voice interviewing Joseph Kony. As interesting as this interview was presented, one question needs to be asked. How does a foreign journalist, who has no direct links with the Lord’s Resistance Army, or its notorious leader manage to contact the entire terrorist group deep in the forest for an interview without any special security arrangement for his safety? How do these journalists always manage to find such people to interview them when in fact the most sophisticated intelligence service networks usually have no knowledge of their whereabouts?
“It would be great to get rid of Joseph Kony and the entire Lord’s Resistance Army. He and his forces have left a path of abductions and mass murder in their wake for over 20 years. But let’s get one thing straight: Joseph Kony is not in Uganda and hasn’t been there for 6 years”, -Keating. Most importantly, I would like to remind the world of one critical statement: “A MAN ALWAYS HAS TWO REASONS FOR DOING ANYTHING- THE ‘GOOD REASON’ AND THE ‘REAL REASON’”, (J.P. Morgan). This is why any such US proposed military intervention must be critically examined especially when it may lead to the establishment of a US military base (AFRICOM) in the country and the possible use of depleted Uranium which equally has devastating consequences. Our experience in Iraq is still fresh in our memories. As we look forward to “get rid of” these terrorists, let us always be guided by the Iraqi experience. The US went to Iraq (and Afghanistan) with the promise to get rid of Al-Qaeda. Today, although Bin Laden “is dead” together with Al-Zawahiri and about 1.2million Iraqis, Al-CIAda is still hanging around in the Middle East and Libya with more sophisticated weapons. Yet, the military contractors made billions of money in these wars. Perhaps the bitter part of this reality is that Al-Qaeda today has grown beyond mere terrorist attacks to a much bigger role of overthrowing governments labelled as evil. Al-Qaeda no longer seem to be a threat since their actions are justified and supported by many governments including the supply of arms to the group (as seen in Libya and Syria). We therefore need to understand that ‘terrorism’ though it is a dangerous threat to global peace and security, it is a very “important partner” to the military industrial complex, who are determined to make trillions of dollars from the war on terror. In fact, the globalist are working hard behind the scenes to keep the wars going for as long as it will take for humanity to wake up and say enough is enough. As these and many such humanitarian scenarios are being presented to us in such appealing manner, let us carefully reflect on what J.F Kennedy, once said: “Things do not just happen. Things are made to happen”. Therefore one wouldn’t be wrong to imagine that some of these developments might not be happening by accident, but a well-planned event.
In order to appreciate the way forward and the most effective way of dealing with terrorism it is important to analyse a few things. First, let us go back to Afghanistan and Iraq. Before the US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, Al-Qaida and the Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laden and a few other terrorists who were on the FBI’s most wanted list. Unfortunately, the then president of the United States, George W. Bush, turned down the offer, claiming that “the US does not negotiate with terrorists”. Yet, after almost 10 years later, it is shocking to see the US negotiating with the same terrorist group in Qatar where the Taliban is reported to have set up an office. Surprisingly, even the United Nations now seem to advocate for peaceful negotiations rather that conflict with the Taliban. So, the burning question is: if negotiations are the way forward, then why does the US always proceed with many years of military conflict before it proposes negotiation after hundreds of thousands of civilians’ casualties has been created?
Imagining the impossible- “the audacity of hope”
Many Al-Qaeda leaders have been assassinated, yet Al-Qaeda has expanded its sphere of influence to at least two regions: Africa and the Middle East. One would wonder why these leaders were never captured alive to use their sphere of influence to convince the entire Al-Qaida group to lay down their weapons for an ‘attractive offer’ in other to end this assault and retaliations that keeps us going round in circles? Isn’t it possible to imagine a world where the US, instead of ‘targeted assassinations” rather choose to negotiate with the Al-Qaeda group as it is currently being done with the Taliban? Can anyone imagine a world where Bin Laden and a few of such rebel leaders are seen in the news, shaken hands with world leaders, holding summits together and appealing to their followers to lay down their weapons? Wonderful woundn’t it? Just imagine, a world where African leaders are seen everywhere on TV, interacting with Joseph Kony, leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army, and even leaders of the Al-Shabaab holding summits together and appealing to their followers to lay down their weapons? Many people may feel this approach is completely impossible and certainly not the best way forward. But I have a strong conviction that this approach would have given the best definition to the true meaning of “the audacity of hope”. As impossible as it might seem, I believe this approach would create a very wonderful world for humanity; a world where terrorism and weapons of mass destruction would be of no use; a world where even those who might aspire to become notorious, may have no such motivation because there will be no bitterness within their hearts.
But unfortunately, these imaginations may never be given any priority and might never come to reality. Because behind all the chaos and the instability created by the bad guys; there is always a window of opportunity for some ‘investors’ and the ‘good guys’ to reap their benefits while the poor ordinary people suffer. This is the reason why even though I support the fight against terrorism, I still have my reservations, especially when the military option is always given the utmost priority above all other approach.
By Dr. Saka