Imperialists Tripping Over Each Other In Western Africa

[The following article from Sons of Malcolm gives the best explanation for the Mali invasion, whether it is for Empire or anti-Empire.  It is often so difficult to tell which side of the Hegelian coin is facing up, but the planned synthesis will normally contain both sides of the equation.  The report from Malcolm highlights the new understanding that the Imperialist powers are not always of one mind when it comes to new aggressions and getting blamed for them afterwards.  

The American/British position is always dominant in all things, yet upstart partner nations like France sometimes mistakenly think that they have some sort of independence of action just because American controllers allow them to share in the bloodshed, usually because of proximity of French forces to remote events, like those taking place in the former French colonies.  In Mali, American Imperialists were well on their way to controlling the entire country before their plans ran into the unintended consequences of the fateful destruction of Libya, in the form of heavily armed Tuareg tribal veterans who helped to defend Qaddafi.  The Pentagon was already well into incorporating this unforeseen circumstance into the existing great plan for taking over the new Libya-destabilized scenario in Mali, when the French butted-in to challenge the “Islamists” (SEE:  SOCOM Manufactured French Invasion of Mali, Training the Man Behind the Coup).  

Now that France is running up against all of the previously known factors which should have dissuaded Hollande from emulating Sarkozy’s strutting in Libya (lack of sufficient air transport, shortages of cash, smart weaponry, etc.), the US is prepared to make-up for the missing airlift capacity for the operation.  As usual, the Americans are sponsoring or trying to sponsor all sides in this latest conflict waiting to be managed.  

So, what we have in Mali is a supreme Imperial fuck-up, turned into a “cluster-fuck” by the unwanted French intervention.  “Islamists” are supposed to be co-opted or bought-off, NOT wiped-out.  Dumb ass French!]



Some people who oppose nato in Libya are stating that the coup in Mali is somehow some pro-Jamahirya, anti-imperialist development there. This article is a good balance to that notion. Reading through empire’s risk analysts and their media and newspapers, it seems rather clear that imperialism is not only not bothered with the coup, but sees it as something that goes in their interests.
Like some other struggles of the Global South, the Libyan resistance community online is stuffed full of odd balls and spies, and there is non-stop un-sourced un-cited claims and no doubt western intelligence service false news that is constantly spread about. If there isnt a solid source to a claim, if a video cannot be solidly verified, dont believe it and it is probably a good idea not the spread that news.
If there really was an anti-imperialist coup in Mali, it would be the perfect event for the imperialism’s propaganda machine to go into overdrive and justify the further re-colonisation of Africa. As the article states, there has been some minimal and meek protests from the west which costs them very little, and actually this coup may serve or even have been as a result of a wink and a nudge from empire.
Sukant Chanda, Sons of Malcolm
Mali Coup Has US Interventionism Written All Over It
The military coup that took place last week in Mali is a monument to the consequences of U.S. interventionism, and the military junta now vying for control of the West African country threatens to roll back democracy and human rights for the 15 million people living there.

Rebel troops seized power and toppled the government in a bid to oust President Amadou Toumani Toure who they claim insufficiently supported the military in a fight against Tuareg militants waging an insurgency in the north. Toure himself came to power in a 1991 coup, but surprised many when he handed power to a civilian government and was elected president in 2002.

The mutinous troops that led the coup have imposed a national curfew, announced the temporary suspension of the constitution,arrested their political opponents, and taken control of the state television broadcast. Already their reign is starkly contrasted with the widely acknowledged democratic record of the government they overthrew.

While Mali seems geopolitically insignificant compared to many other countries in Washington’s purview, U.S. foreign policy helped lay the groundwork for this coup.

The aftereffects of the U.S.-led NATO war in Libya which ousted Muammar Gadhafi had a strong hand in fomenting the coup and the coup leader, Captain Amadou Sanogo, received extensive training in the U.S. from 2004-2010.

Gadhafi had hired and armed many Tuareg fighters to defend him against the NATO-backed rebellion in Libya, and they returned to Mali at the Libyan war’s end stronger and more determined than ever. The Malian army’s frustration with President Toure for not arming them sufficiently to fight the Tuaregs reached a boiling point.

“The Libyan crisis didn’t cause this coup but certainly revealed the malaise felt within the army,” the Malian newspaper columnist Adam Thiam told the BBC News.

UN report released in February assessing ”the Libyan crisis” claimed that the impact of the NATO-backed rebel victory over Gadhafi “reverberated across the world” as “such neighboring countries as…Mali,” among many others, “bore the brunt of the challenges that emerged as a result of the crisis.”

“The Governments of these countries, especially those in the Sahel region, had to contend with the influx of hundreds of thousands of traumatized and impoverished returnees as well as the inflow of unspecified and unquantifiable numbers of arms and ammunition from the Libyan arsenal,” the report said.

The Malian government under President Toure has received millions of dollars in economic and military aid from Washington, especially since he started claiming the Tuaregs were aligned with al-Qaeda. The U.S. government “provided almost $138 million dollars in foreign assistance for Mali,” State Department African affairs spokeswoman Hilary Renner told McClatchy News. The aid was expected to rise in 2012 to over $170 million.

Sanogo, the coup leader, ”participated in several U.S.-funded International Military Education and Training (IMET) programs in the United States, including basic officer training,” Renner said. Trainees are handpicked for the program by U.S. embassies.

In addition to the International Military Education and Training program, Mali has also participated in the Trans Sahara Counter Terrorism Partnership, which bolsters U.S. military dominance throughout the region under the rubric of counterterrorism.

Mali also recently hosted U.S. troops in a military exercise named Atlas Accord 12. ”We have regularly had small teams traveling in and out of Mali to conduct specific training that has been requested by the Malian government and military,” Nicole Dalrymple, a spokeswoman for the Africa Command, told McClatchy.

Washington has attempted to paint the coup in Mali as undesirable, urging a return to civilian rule and threatening to cut off aid. But the alleged motivation of the rebel troops – that tougher counterterrorism measures are needed to fight the Tuareg insurgents – seems to overlap with Washington’s “national security” demands for the Sahel region.

Whether the coup was an intended U.S. plot is not known for sure at this point (although secret coups are a common tool in the established historical record of U.S. foreign policy). Either way Washington’s interventionist foreign policy undoubtedly had a hand in the events in Mali, and to the detriment of the Malian people, it seems.

Posted by