Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Lacelle who wrote (16033)	2/16/2000 5:26:00 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17770

Re: Can you answer this question for me? Why is it, President Bill Clinton found it necessary to use the military and the NATO alliance to try and stop the ethnic violence in the Balkans, but not in Indonesia and Ruanda? Could it be that those people in the Balkans are Caucasian and those in Indonesia and Ruanda are Asian and Black, respectively? Hmmm...if you ask me, I'd say that it is Liberal White Males that are the racists.... Well, that's a touchy issue. Firstly, let me remind you of a speech President Clinton delivered in the aftermath of the Kosovo liberation war: Clinton boldly claimed that, in the future, NATO might carry out its duties in Eastern Europe as well as in Africa! Besides, remember Clinton's watershed tour in Central Africa: whitehouse.gov Such an assertive diplomacy towards what used to be France's African backyard was obviously not to please the French (and, to some extent, their Belgian satellite). Hence, the French blew out the US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya less than 6 months later.... :o( --as a warning notice to the US. Anyway, in the long run, subsaharan Africa will wind up in the US's pocket.... so far as a progressive US administration is in charge. I mean, just think of how the Bush administration blundered in its Restore Hope operation in Somalia: this was supposed to be a sure thing for the US military --until a few marines got caught up in a skirmish with an anti-US gang. The Somalia fiasco triggered an irreparable geopolitical damage: both America's and the world's public opinion watched a molested-to-death US soldier dragged in the streets, amidst a cheering crowd.... Thank you Mr George Herbert Bush for this political bummer! Although Central Africa is ripe for the US to get it all sewn up, there's still a cultural complex among US elites that's hindering their African lust: Washington just doesn't want to look like the "bad-neocolonialist-whitey"! As regards the Ruanda genocide, the question is: Who masterminded the shooting-down of the plane that had both Ruanda's and Burundi's president on board? Again, it was France that had a vested interest in supporting the Tutsi regime against Uganda-trained, anglophile rebels. In brief, I think the best African strategy for the US is to rely on both South Africa and its East African allies (Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda) to push itself westward (ie Congo/Kinshasa, Congo/Brazzaville, Cameroon, etc.). At the same time, Israel's intelligence should be quarantined as regards the US foray into Europe's African turf since Israel henceforth will have interest in playing off Europe against the US. Maintaining the status quo in the Africa/Europe/US scheme might fit Lazard Freres's business interests indeed but it's certainly not advantageous to Central Africa's deprived populaces. Nor is it propitious to US global capitalism's long term interest. Regarding Indonesia, I think we should factor China in the equation. The situation, however, is quite different from the Balkans: there is no NATO-like military alliance in South East Asia and Indonesia's neighboring countries are all developing nations (Malaysia, Philippines, Vietnam,...). We should also bear in mind the fact that the self-determination issue for the Timorese will, sooner or later, be linked to the Taiwanese snag....