Two African Crises Merge... With U.S. Help
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. |
