Two African Crises Merge... With U.S. Help
stratfor.com
Two major, long-running African crises are merging, feeding on each other
and threatening to envelop the continent in one great tangled web of
conflict. The war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) long
ago went multinational, with Angola, Namibia, and Zimbabwe intervening
on behalf of the government of Laurent Kabila, and Rwanda and Uganda
supporting the ethnic Tutsi rebels. On Tuesday, Uganda's "New Vision"
newspaper reported that Sudan had sent 2,000 troops, including 700
Sudanese- sponsored Ugandan rebels, to support the Kabila regime in the
DRC. The newspaper cited Tutsi rebels in the DRC as reporting that
Sudanese troops were airlifted last week from Khartoum and Juba to front
line positions in Kindu, Isiro, and Lubumbashi. Agence France Presse
slightly contradicted the New Vision report, however, citing an unnamed
security source as saying the majority of the Sudanese force in the DRC
were, in fact, Rwandan Interahamwe, who have been training in Sudan for
nearly a year.
Sudan's involvement in the DRC complicates, and is in large part driven
by, its existing struggle against Ugandan-backed rebels. Uganda supports
the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA), which is battling the regime
in Khartoum, and Sudan, in turn, supports several rebel groups battling
Kampala. Sudan certainly wants to aid a potential ally, Kabila, to
Uganda's rear. The proxy war between Sudan and Uganda escalated last
week, with a series of clashes in Sudan's Eastern Equatoria province.
Sudanese army spokesman, Lieutenant General Abd al-Rahman Sirr
al-Khatim, claimed on September 21 that Sudanese soldiers had fought
Ugandan regular army troops in Eastern Equatoria, and that the Ugandans
had made no attempt to disguise their involvement. According to Sirr
al-Khatim, Sudanese forces destroyed 11 Ugandan tanks, three armored
vehicles, and several armored personnel carriers. He claimed that the
Ugandan troops came from the towns of Kitgum and Gulu, and were
recognizable by their arms, equipment, and fatigues.
Ugandan Defense Forces spokesman, Shaban Bantariza, denied Ugandan
involvement, asking Sudan to prove its claims, and asserting that the forces
in the clashes were those of the SPLA. Sirr al-Khatim's claims went
further, however, as he stated that the Ugandan equipment matched that of
their allies, "such as the Eritrean People's Front (EPF) regime." Sirr
al-Khatim said, "All evidence in the field indicates that the general
mobilization in Uganda against Sudan is extensive and continuous."
Furthermore, the general said, "These events in Eastern Equatoria have
coincided with the increasing movements of EPF forces along the border,
the evacuation of residents from the border areas on their side, and the
increasing concentration of their forces on the border. All this is a
reflection of the hostile intentions and the well-coordinated efforts between
Uganda and the EPF to launch heinous aggressive attacks."
Regardless of Khartoum's claims, before Eritrea can mobilize against
Sudan, it must settle its dispute with Ethiopia. For five months, Ethiopia
and Eritrea have been in a state of war over a section of their common
border, but there have recently been signs of a stepped up effort to settle
the dispute. Former Sudanese Premier and member of the rebel National
Democratic Alliance (NDA), Sadek al-Mahdi, was in Addis Ababa on
September 22 on a "good offices mission" to help solve the border
conflict. The NDA is the umbrella organization that unites Eritrean-backed
Sudanese rebel forces in the north with the Ugandan-backed rebels in the
south. According to a source close to Mahdi's delegation, he met with
"Ethiopia's largest bodies," and three days previously had met with
Eritrean authorities.
Also suddenly stepping up its efforts to settle the Ethiopian- Eritrean
border dispute is the United States, which also backs the Sudanese rebels.
On September 18, the U.S. and Italy called on the two countries to
cooperate with the mediation efforts of the Organization of African Unity.
On September 22, the Ethiopian government newspaper "Addis Zemen"
reported that the U.S. and Italy had donated $10.23 million to help
Ethiopians displaced by the border dispute.
There are other indications of U.S. intentions toward both Sudan and the
DRC, raising questions of a possible U.S. role in orchestrating the linking
of these two crises. Despite the fact that Assistant Secretary of State for
Africa, Susan Rice, assured Congress that the U.S. considers the conflict
in the DRC "among the most dangerous in the world" and is not assisting
any of the DRC's neighbors to intervene, she said on the satellite
broadcast "African Journal" program that "The DRC should not be used
as a haven for UNITA, Interahamwe and others to destabilize Uganda,
Rwanda, and Angola." On the same program, former Assistant Secretary
of State for Africa, Herman Cohen, who served in the Reagan and Bush
administrations, said "Certainly, Uganda has very legitimate reasons for
intervening in the Congo crisis. Congo is a source of regional instability.
Even Rwanda and Angola have legitimate reasons to send troops there."
On September 19, the Secretary General of the Political Department of
Sudan's National Congress, Muhammad al-Hasan al- Amin, announced
that Khartoum had received a document from the U.S., charging Sudan
with continuing to support the terrorist groups of Osama Bin Laden, who
were planning additional attacks on U.S. interests. According to Amin, the
document said that the U.S. would hold Sudan responsible for any further
attacks against U.S. citizens and interests, anywhere in the world. On
September 20, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir announced that the
U.S. government had sent Khartoum an unsigned document, threatening to
attack other targets in Sudan. Bashir said Sudan "would welcome this
second strike, and it would not file a complaint with the Security Council,
because it would retaliate." He said Sudan's reaction "would be painful."
It is questionable whether even the Clinton administration would resort to
the crude tactic of sending unsigned, unheaded threats to Khartoum. But
increased U.S. involvement in Ethiopia and support for Uganda,
apparently as part of a plan to facilitate a new Sudanese rebel offensive, is
evident. These new U.S. efforts against Sudan, following the
now-questioned attack on the Shifa chemical plant, demonstrate a
renewed commitment by Washington to topple the regime in Khartoum.
The Shifa attack was but a first step. However, contributing to the
potential formation of a battlefield stretching from Luanda to Asmara is a
dangerous game. We hope it's worth it.
>>>Looks like the attacks on Sudan and Iraq were attempts to topple
>>>foreign regimes. |
