To: George Papadopoulos who wrote (15873 ) 1/28/2000 12:05:00 PM From: GUSTAVE JAEGER Respond to of 17770
Belgian Foreign Minister criticises US role in AfricaBy Richard Tyler 13 September 1999 Bourgeois diplomacy is usually the art of speaking between the lines. When it comes to articulating decisive economic and geopolitical interests, the diplomat and foreign affairs spokesperson normally choose their words carefully. A recent interview with Belgian Deputy Premier and Foreign Minister Louis Michel, broke with the customarily measured tones of international relations. The article, headlined "Louis Michel wants to bind the destiny of Africa and Europe," was also used to voice some blunt criticism of the role of the United States in Africa, and in the Balkans. "I would like to know what, exactly, are the ulterior motives of the USA regarding Africa ... I would like to know what they really want," he told Le Soir [Belgium's foremost French daily]. "They supported Kabila, now they play the Rwandan Kagame against Kabila. They are obviously pawns. I can't see what perspective the United States can give to Kagame. I ask myself, to what extent the cessation of the economic exploitation of the natural resources that exist in the Congo has been arranged by the USA? And if, at a given time, they won't come forward themselves with a financial plan to improve the economy, under which they will, of course, profit the most." In the wake of NATO's Balkan war, voices within Europe's ruling elite are increasingly calling for the continent to take a more independent role from the USA. Antagonisms are also growing between America and Europe on a whole range of issues--trade, defence, new geopolitical and geostrategic issues, etc. Under such circumstances, demands for greater European independence must also find their expression in foreign policy considerations. Michel's utterances should be seen in this context. Serious European criticism of the USA first arose in the aftermath of the Gulf War, which placed the region's vital oil supplies effectively under American control. In particular Germany --one of the largest Western trade partners of Iraq--was angry at being effectively closed out of this lucrative market. Although German troops did not participate in this first major imperialist assault following the end of the "Cold War", the country was asked to finance the war to the tune of $6.6 billion. In the aftermath of the war, the bulk of the reconstruction contracts in Kuwait went to American firms. As long as the Soviet Union existed, the Western powers generally subordinated their differences and acceded to American hegemony, in the interests of presenting a united front to their perceived common enemy. The collapse of the USSR has fundamentally altered the balance of forces internationally. America's subsequent claim to be the world's sole super-power, based upon its presently undeniable military advantage, increasingly brings it into conflict with its erstwhile allies. It is not possible to play the role of the world's "policeman" without laying down the law. And it is not just alleged criminals who may find they get their heads tapped with the American night-stick.Le Soir also writes, "In the same way, he [Michel] wonders if the Balkans are not also a strategic stake for the United States in order to delay a larger Europe." At this time, it is somewhat easier for the Belgian Foreign Minister to express the real concerns of the European powers. But what Michel is saying openly in Brussels, is being talked about behind closed doors in London, Paris and Berlin. Mark Eyskens, a former Belgian Prime Minister, summed up the central problem confronting the European Union several years ago with the words: " L'Europe est un g‚ant ‚conomique, un nain politique et, pire encore, un ver de terre lorsqu'il s'agit d'‚laborer une capacit‚ de d‚fense." (Europe is an economic giant, a political dwarf, and, even worse, a worm until it concerns itself with elaborating a defence capability.) [snip]wsws.org