HAPPY NEW YEAR...

...to all visitors to Regrets Only...Please keep coming back...again...and again...and again.
Thanks

Bush-Whacking Obama With A Late-Breaking Military Operation In Africa?

16 years ago, less than two months before leaving the White House, then-President George H.W. Bush announced he was ordering US forces into strife-torn Somalia in "Operation Restore Hope".

Mr. Bush said the United States had no intention of getting involved in a long-term military action or to get embroiled in any effort to dictate Somalia's political future. He said US forces had one goal only and that was to ensure that starving Somalis were fed.

The President reached his decision while on his Thanksgiving break at his Kennebunkport, Maine retreat in November 1992 – shortly after he lost the Presidential election to Bill Clinton. I was among the small group of reporters in Maine covering Mr. Bush.

In Maine, then-Presidential spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said Mr. Clinton, in his words, was being very supportive. But another senior White House official also in Kennebunkport told reporters the planned US military action would be completed quickly because even though President-elect Clinton had endorsed the mission, it would not be fair to saddle the incoming administration with an nfinished operation.

Well, we know it didn’t end quickly and the Clinton administration was saddled with Somalia into 1995.

The current relevance of this flashback is a question triggered by a Nicholas Kristof column in last Sunday’s New York Times: could the current outgoing Bush administration saddle the incoming Obama administration with yet another military operation --- this time, an operation aimed against Sudan?

At this late date --- a full month later than the first President Bush acted --- it would seem highly unlikely, especially given the added complication of a military force already pushed to the limit by the US commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But according to Kristof, a top Bush administration official has been pushing for tough action against Sudan over Darfur.

Kristof reports Ambassador Richard Williamson, who is US Special Envoy to Sudan, wrote a tough memo to Mr. Bush this fall outlining three particular steps the United States could take.

These steps were:

--jamming all communications in Khartoum, the Sudanese capital. This would include all telephone calls, all cellular service, all Internet access. After two days, having demonstrated Sudan’s vulnerability, the United States could halt the jamming.

--apply progressive pressure to Port Sudan, from which Sudan exports oil and thus earns revenue. The first step would be to send naval vessels near the port. The next step would be to search or turn back some ships, and the final step would be to impose a quarantine and halt Sudan’s oil exports.

--The United States could target Sudanese military aircraft that defy a United Nations ban on offensive military flights in Darfur. The first step would be to destroy a helicopter gunship on the ground at night. A tougher approach would be to warn Sudan it will lose its air force — and then if it does not comply, to destroy all its military aircraft on the ground.

Kristof says officials frustrated by the administration’s passivity on the genocide in Darfur shared these possible steps with him, partly to make clear that President-elect Obama can do more if he has the political will.

Is Mr. Obama likely to do anything anytime soon? We’ll have to wait and see. But it seems his military priorities, like Mr. Bush’s, are more likely to be Iraq and Afghanistan. And don’t forget this: instead of Sudan, maybe the only late-breaking Bush operation or early Obama mission involving US forces could be once again in Somalia --- this time directed ostensibly at pirates.

Chinese Task Force Moving Closer to Somalia; Special Forces Practice Simulated Airdrops on Hijacked or Pirate Vessels

China’s official Xinhua news agency is reporting the Chinese naval task force en route to the Gulf of Aden and waters off Somalia for an escort mission against pirates will enter the Indian Ocean on Tuesday (12/30/08).

The fleet, two destroyers and one supply ship, on Monday passed through the Malacca Strait after a three-day voyage, which started from China's Hainan Province.

According to the Xinhua reporter aboard the Navy's flagship destroyer Wuhan, members of a special force unit aboard the warships carried out anti-piracy training with a ship-borne helicopter, from which they dropped by rope onto the deck to simulate landing on hijacked or pirate vessels.

Somali Pirates Deny Links to Islamist Radicals

VOA Correspondent Alisha Ryu’s extraordinary trip to a Somali pirate haven has provided yet another important news lead: Somali pirates are denying reports they are sharing ransom payments with an al-Qaida-linked radical Islamist group called the Shabab. Correspondent Ryu just visited the pirate sanctuary of Hobyo in the Galmudug region of central Somalia. Despite the pirate’s denial, she reports some pirate money may be making its way indirectly to Islamist group:

Hobyo resident Ibaado Aden, 65, watched a shiny sport utility vehicle slowly approaching the main market area of the village.

She said nothing. But it was clear from the look of concern on her face that the vehicle's occupants were pirates. They are the only people who can afford such luxury in this remote and dirt-poor fishing village, hundreds of kilometers from the nearest city.

Ibaado Aden abruptly ended our interview. She did not want to talk about pirates, especially about what they do with the ransom they receive.

She said the pirates give the people nothing, and she does not know where or how the pirates spend their money.

Somali pirate groups operating in Hobyo and Haradhere in central Somalia and in the northern town of Eyl in Puntland have hijacked more than 40 vessels this year. The unprecedented number of hijackings has prompted at least a dozen countries, including the United States, China and Russia, to send warships to the region to protect vulnerable shipping lanes. The pirates still hold at least 19 vessels and more than 350 crew members hostage.

The United Nations believes pirates may have earned as much as $120 million in ransom payments. And there has been rising concern among western diplomats and security analysts that a large chunk of the money is being funneled to the militant Shabab group.

It was the rise of the Shabab militia, which prompted the Ethiopian military, with U.S. support, to intervene in Somalia in late 2006 and end the six-month rule of the Islamic Courts Union.

Since then, the Shabab has led a two-year insurgency against the country's weak, Ethiopia-backed interim government. The group, which the United States has labeled a terrorist organization, has now regained control over most parts of southern and central Somalia.

In an alarming article published earlier this month in the U.S.-based Time magazine, one alleged pirate claimed that the Shabab and other Islamist insurgent groups have been extorting vast sums of money from pirates and using it to fund the insurgency.

Through intermediaries in Hobyo, VOA located a pirate who agreed to be interviewed. Introducing himself only as Kahiye, the 26-year-old pirate, whom residents confirm has been involved in numerous hijacking operations, scoffed at the Time magazine article.

Kahiye said pirate groups in Somalia only conduct business with people they refer to as investors. Investors, he said, are not factional leaders or politicians, but former Somali fishermen who made money from pirate activities in the past.

Kahiye would not say how many investors are involved in piracy in Somalia. But he said they are essential to hijacking operations because the investors usually pick the targets and provide all that is necessary for pirates on the ground to conduct successful operations and to hold the ships and crew for ransom.

When a ransom is paid, these investors receive as much as 50 percent of the ransom, pirates 30 to 40 percent, and the remaining amount is usually set aside to be used in the next hijacking venture.

Kahiye continued, insisting that no money is ever given to the Shabab. He said all of the money ends up being spent on recruiting new pirates and buying houses, cars, and huge quantities of a mildly narcotic leaf called khat, which is chewed by many Somali men.

Kahiye said he believes some investors pay bribes to local, regional, and government officials to look the other way. Kahiye acknowledged he does not fully know how investors spend their portion of the ransom payments.

Hobyo, like the village of Haradhere to the south, are currently under the control of Islamist fighters belonging to the Shabab and another rival group made up of more moderate Islamists. Both groups are firmly opposed to piracy, calling it an offense against Islam. In 2006, Islamic courts officials implemented strict Islamic laws, which briefly stopped piracy in Somalia.

Well-placed Somali sources told VOA that while it is unlikely that investors and pirates are willingly handing over millions of dollars to hard-line Islamist leaders who have vowed to stop piracy, it is possible that they do pay some protection money to local Shabab commanders and other low-level Islamist officials to keep them from interfering in piracy operations.

Pirate foot soldiers may also be contributing to Islamist groups without meaning to do so.

Some pirates, like Kahiye, were once poorly-paid clan militia fighters who were recently lured into the far more lucrative world of piracy. But pirates often have friends and family, who support the Islamist insurgency. It is likely, some sources said, that the money pirates are giving to family and clan members is also reaching the coffers of Islamist groups. <

No Pirate Hunting for AFRICOM: Confirmed!

The Pentagon said yesterday the new U.S. military command for Africa will not have responsibility for security in the Gulf of Aden, where pirates have been menacing merchant ships. We reported this back on October 14th but it is now confirmed in a new map published by the U.S. Defense Department which outlines the borders of the Africa Command's responsibilities.

VOA Correspondent Al Pessin reports the official map shows Africa Command has responsibility for U.S. military activity throughout the continent except for Egypt, which remains part of Central Command's area.

But for the first time, this map indicates that Africa Command will not have responsibility for any of the waters off the continent's north shore on the Mediterranean, its northwestern shore on the Atlantic, and its northeastern shorelines on the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. It is that last area where pirates have attacked dozens of ships, and still hold hundreds of hostages.

The U.S. Navy and allied forces have been working to track and deter pirates in the area, with direction from Central Command's Naval headquarters in Bahrain, and that will continue. Africa Command's maritime responsibility will be only for the southern part of the continent, south from the Kenya-Somalia border in the east and from Mauritania-Western Sahara border in the west.

Much of that naval activity will involve training and mentoring for local navies, and humanitarian relief and military training in coastal countries. Africa Command does not have its own naval forces or naval base, but officials said U.S. Navy Ships based in other parts of the world will continue to make extended visits to the waters off the coasts of Africa, as they have in recent years.

Pentagon Spokesman Bryan Whitman said the updated Unified Command Plan also orders the seven top regional U.S. commanders, including the head of Africa Command, to increase their capabilities designed to promote stability and avoid conflicts.

"It also assigns all combatant commanders the responsibility for planning and conducting military support to stability, security, transition and reconstruction operations, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief," he said.

That order fits with recent directives ordering the U.S. military services to increase their ability to conduct stability operations and to build skills in a broad range of combat activities, from training and low-level conflict to major campaigns involving heavy weapons.

Whitman said Egypt was kept in Central Command because it is political and culturally linked more to the rest of the command's area in the Middle East. But Israel and the Palestinian Territories will remain part of European Command's responsibility.

Chinese Warships Ready to Set Sail for Somalia

VOA Correspondent Stephanie Ho reports from Beijing that preparations are almost complete for three Chinese navy ships to head out this Friday to help fight pirates off the coast of Somalia.

She quotes Rear Admiral Xiao Xinnian, deputy chief of staff of the People's Liberation Army Navy, as saying the mission demonstrates that the Chinese government is committed to its international obligations and that it is a responsible major country.

The Chinese grouping will include two destroyers, one supply ship, two helicopters and special operations forces. The ships will leave Friday from southern Hainan Province.

The ships are armed with missile cannon systems and the troops will carry light weapons.

Xiao says the Chinese ships are ready to work with the other international military ships in the region and learn from their experiences.

Report from a Somali Pirate Haven

Alisha Ryu, VOA's East Africa correspondent, has been in Somalia and has just filed this extraordinary report from the remote pirate stronghold of Hobyo in the Galmudug region of central Somalia. The growing strength of Islamist groups in the coastal area may be tied to local anger over piracy and deepening poverty.

Ryu's report: The sight of emerald-green waves breaking along Hobyo's shores is worthy of a postcard. The white sandy beach stretches endlessly onward and is broken up only by the outline of a quiet fishing village in the distance.

Walking into the village, several women cross our path, startled at the sight of a foreigner in Hobyo. They say nothing and move on quickly. We are later told that no foreigner has visited the village in more than a decade.

Despite its serene appearance, this tiny community, 260 kilometers south of the provincial capital Galkayo, has the dubious distinction of being one of the most dangerous places on earth. Along with the coastal towns of Eyl in northern Puntland and Haradhere to the south, Hobyo is a well-known sanctuary for pirates, who have operated along the Somali coast for the past several years.

The pirates made international headlines this year by seizing more than 40 vessels and earning an estimated $120 million in ransom.

At least a half a dozen U.S. warships are currently in the area keeping an eye on the MV Faina, an arms-laden Ukrainian freighter hijacked by pirates three months ago. The ship is anchored about 30 kilometers off the coast of Hobyo. Another hijacked ship, a Saudi supertanker carrying an oil cargo worth $100 million, is anchored between Hobyo and Haradhere.

Pirates are demanding multi-million dollar ransoms for both vessels.

Thirty-year-old Hobyo resident Sharif Wadad Ade speaks with bitterness about the pirates based here, describing them as outsiders who use the village only as a convenient hide-out.
Ade says if the pirates were from Hobyo, they would be spending their share of the ransom money to help the community. But he says the pirates come from different parts of Somalia, so they do nothing to help the people.

Local clan elder Saeed Aden adds that residents are also angry because they believe the threat of kidnappings posed by pirates is what is preventing western aid agencies from visiting the area and setting up offices.

Aden says Hobyo and other nearby coastal towns were nearly wiped out by the Asian tsunami, which hit the Somali coast four years ago. Aden says many Somalis living along the coast are in desperate need of direct humanitarian assistance.

He says the villagers do not support the pirates and just want the international community to come here and help.

Such anti-pirate sentiment contradicts recent media reports that suggest residents in Hobyo and other coastal towns have a close relationship with pirates. Those reports say pirate activities have provided much-needed jobs and the pirates contribute to local economies by spending lavishly.

But there is little in Hobyo to suggest that the residents are benefiting from the millions being paid to pirates. There are few goods on sale in the main market. The village has no running water or power. There is a pharmacy, but no doctors. There is a school house, but there are no teachers or students.

The village appears to exemplify all that has gone wrong in Somalia since 1991, when the country's last functioning government fell and factions fought to fill the vacuum.

In June 2006, an Islamist movement took power from a group of U.S.-supported factional leaders, restored law and order and ended piracy in many parts of Somalia through the institution of strict Islamic laws.

The Islamists were ousted six months later by Ethiopian forces, who intervened to prop up a secular, but unpopular, central government. Since then, Ethiopian and government troops have been fighting a losing battle to keep the Islamists, including a militant militia called the Shabab, from regaining power.

A pirate, who identifies himself only as Kahiye, says because Hobyo has been under the authority of local clans, it has been easy for pirates belonging to the same clan groups to use Hobyo as a haven.

But Kahiye says all pirates in central Somalia are under severe pressure from Islamists to disband.

He says in recent months, pirates trying to go ashore in any area controlled by the Islamists have been threatened and chased away.

Somali sources tell VOA that the Islamists' tough stance against piracy has prompted many poor people in coastal communities to quietly begin supporting the return of Islamist rule.

And that is what they say may have emboldened local Shabab fighters to seize Hobyo on Sunday. According to eyewitnesses, the Shabab launched a surprise attack against pirates in Hobyo and the two sides fought a ferocious battle in the village before the pirates retreated.

While the loss of Hobyo to the Shabab has dealt a clear blow to piracy, it raises another troubling question, especially for the United States and its western allies. They must now decide which, pirates or militant Islamists, pose a greater threat to global security and economy.

Iranian Warship Enters Somali Waters: Watch Out Pirates!

Iran's state-run Voice of the Islamic Republic radio reports that an Iranian warship has entered the Gulf of Aden to defend Iranian ships against pirates. The report says that after traveling 4,000 nautical miles, the warship has entered Somali waters, the center of pirate activity.

The radio report recalls that pirates have so far hijacked two Iranian ships. One of the ships, carrying wheat, is still under the control of the pirates.

The Iranian radio report notes that "Three days ago, China also announced that in order to fight against pirates, it will send warships to Somali waters. At present apart from the European Union which has sent six warships and three fighters to the Sea of Aden, other countries including America, Russia, India and Greece also have warships in the region."

Hollow Threats Will Embolden Somalia’s Pirates

If you haven’t already seen it, I would encourage you to read Doug Farah’s latest posting on the UN decision to authorize further action against Somali pirates.

The section that caught my eye and which largely corresponds to my own assessment is this:

The Rwandan genocide was predicated in part on the belief that the international community (meaning the UN or countries individually) would be too weak and indecisive to intervene. The token UN force sent, with no mandate to act and unwilling to protect civilians, became the catalyst for ever-greater violence against those they were in theory there to protect. They bet right.

The Somali pirate gangs, holding several ships and more than 100 hostages, are likely to wonder what the news means. When they figure out it means nothing, they will redouble their activities in an effort to show the world they can operate despite the public promises to stop them.

Until one is ready to act, it is far better to stay silent. Brandishing hollow threats only emboldens those, who, like the Somali pirates, continue to successfully bet that the outside world, for all its threats, has no real intention of doing anything significant.

Pirates Watch Out! Here Come The Chinese

China will send ships to help combat piracy off the coast of Somalia. VOA’s Stephanie Ho reports from Beijing the announcement comes one day after a senior Chinese official told the United Nations Security Council China is more than ready to help.

A front-page report in the official English-language China Daily newspaper quotes an unnamed source as saying, "There will be a significant peacekeeping operation" in Somalia.

The report says China is ready to send a naval mission to fight pirates in Somali waters. But it offers no details as to the scale of the Chinese mission or when it will be sent to Africa.

The Chinese ships would be joining an international flotilla, which includes vessels from the United States, Russia, Denmark and Italy.

Earlier, Chinese Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei told the United Nations China is "seriously considering" the mission, which would be an unprecedented deployment of the country's navy.

The official Xinhua News Agency quotes Somali Foreign Minister Ali Ahmed Jama as welcoming China's participation in the fight against pirates. The Somali official is also reported as saying his country will do its best to secure the release of captured Chinese sailors and vessels.

Xinhua says Somali pirates are still holding captive one Chinese vessel and 17 Chinese nationals.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao says China supports international efforts to fight Somali piracy.

VOA Correspondent Ho reports China has traditionally kept its troops close to home, reflecting its consistent policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of another country. But, as China's economic clout has grown, it has become increasingly involved in peacekeeping operations around the world, including in Haiti and in Sudan's troubled Darfur region.

Russia Making a Move on Africa?

Foreign Policy magazine has published a list of what it calls the top 10 stories you have missed in 2008. One of them is about Russia’s “courting of Africa.”

According to FP, “Russia is moving into Africa in a big way, snatching up gas and oil deals, with an eye on winning even greater leverage over the global energy market.”

The article notes that in September, Russia’s state-controlled energy monopoly Gazprom obtained gas concessions in Nigeria, and it agreed to help the West African country fund a 2,700-mile trans-Saharan pipeline to Europe.

FP reports Gazprom, in a joint venture with Italy’s Eni, is also looking to finance a pipeline from Libya that would carry natural gas under the Mediterranean. Russia offered to buy all Libyan gas and some of its oil exports. If the deal goes through, it would give Russia complete control over supply to the European Union. Russia has additional deals in Algeria, Angola, Egypt, and the Ivory Coast worth $3.5 billion and expected to be operational by 2010.

FP goes on: “But it’s not just pipelines Russia wants—it’s also hearts and minds. Russia has canceled $20 billion in African debt and recently announced a $500 million aid package for African countries with no strings attached. Russia helped prevent sanctions on Zimbabwe from passing the U.N. Security Council a few months after Zimbabwe was opening a tourism office in Moscow.”

Interestingly, FP doesn’t assess the impact of this on Africa itself. Instead it says Russia’s Africa moves have “Europe very worried.” It says if Russia controls natural gas supplies from the east—through Gazprom’s holdings in Central Asia—as well as the south, that would leave Europe surrounded, with little room to find alternative energy supplies.

Why Somalia Hasn’t Had A Real Government Since 1991

The president of Somalia says he has dismissed the government of Prime Minister Nur Hassan Hussein.

Abdullahi Yusuf said at a press conference Sunday that he will nominate a new prime minister within days. According to Voice of America, Mr. Yusuf said he had dismissed the prime minister because his transitional government was unable to perform its duties.

Prime Minister Hussein says his dismissal is "illegal."

The president and the prime minister have been trying for weeks to form a new cabinet. But Mr. Yusuf has rejected all the candidates for ministry posts suggested by the prime minister.

A presidential adviser said the ministerial candidates failed to meet the president's standards.

Last month, the president said insurgents were in control of most of the country and warned that the government was close to collapse. His remarks followed the capture of several key towns by Islamist militant groups.

Somalia's government has been unable to assert control since its formation in 2004. Islamists took over much of the country in 2006 but were ousted by Ethiopian forces acting in support of the Somali government.

The Islamists began an insurgency in early 2007, sparking almost daily clashes with Ethiopian and government forces. The fighting has killed thousands of Somalis and displaced hundreds of thousands of others, aggravating the country's humanitarian crisis.

Somalia has not had a stable central government since 1991.

Meanwhile, there are further indications the international community isn’t really interested in restoring order in Somalia.

The Pentagon has said it is looking into how it might act on a draft U.N. Security Council resolution, being circulated by the United States, that would, for the first time, authorize military action against pirate bases inside Somalia. But a senior American admiral has expressed skepticism about the plan.

The draft resolution calls on all countries to actively fight piracy off the Somali coast, as many countries including the United States have been doing. The U.S. draft also adds a 12-month authorization for foreign forces to enter Somali territory and airspace to "take all necessary measures" to find and stop pirates, if the transitional Somali government agrees.

But according to VOA’s Pentagon Correspondent Al Pessin, in Bahrain on Friday, Vice Admiral Bill Gortney, the commander of U.S. naval forces in the Middle East, told reporters it would be difficult to identify pirate bases in Somalia because they blend in with the local population, and he said any attacks would likely result in civilian casualties.

Admiral Gortney said piracy can not be ended through U.S. military action alone. He said to do more on piracy he needs better cooperation among all the world's navies, but also a bigger security effort by the shipping industry and improved stability, economic development and rule of law in Somalia in order to reduce the number of men who turn to a life of crime on the high seas. And the admiral says he needs one more thing.

"We need the international community to provide us a mechanism that when we capture pirates we have a process to hold them and then take them to a court of law and hold them accountable for their actions if they're found guilty," he said.

Admiral Gortney says his forces rescued some men on a small boat this week whose engine had gone out and who had no food or water left. The sailors found rifles and grenades in the boat and concluded the men were pirates, but because they had not been observed doing anything wrong the troops had to treat them as "mariners in distress." So they were rescued then set free in Yemen.

On Friday, Pentagon Spokesman Bryan Whitman said there are still a lot of details to work out before the U.S. military would be ready to more aggressive in dealing with pirates, or to take the fight onto land.

"I would tell you that there are many issues associated with this, and you've hit upon a lot of them. There are many challenges to this. There are legal issues out there. There are practical issues with respect to how you would go about doing this. And the United States government is trying to take a look at this in a broad way. And we, as part of that, are certainly going to look at what some of the military aspects would be. We are in the process of that. It's ongoing," he said.

Genocide: Never Again, Maybe…

President-elect Barack Obama is being urged to make the prevention of genocide and mass atrocities a top foreign policy priority. The appeal comes from a special task force headed by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Former Defense Secretary William Cohen. The panel also recommends establishing an early warning system to prevent genocide in the future. (See the VOA report on this here.)

Albright and Cohen both served in President Bill Clinton's cabinet. During Clinton's presidency, atrocities were committed in Bosnia and the genocide in Rwanda occurred.

The two former secretaries teamed up to work with other national leaders to draw up a blueprint to prevent genocide. Albright said the paradox is that the world agrees genocide is unacceptable, and yet mass killings and genocide continue.

"The central premise of our report is that genocide is unacceptable and that we can and should do more to prevent it. The United States does not bear this burden alone, but we have both a duty and a profound interest in helping to show the way," she said.

Cohen said "We can't sit on the sidelines while this is taking place. We have to develop, as Madeleine says, as Secretary Albright says, the leadership, from the president on down, through the Congress. We have to develop institutions."

The panel recommends creating an inter-agency early warning system to analyze threats of genocide, and investing $250 million in new funds for crisis prevention and response.

Note: My thinking on this was shaped by having been in Rwanda while the Clinton administration refused to acknowledge what was happening was genocide. Frankly, I don’t see the need for new institutions or additional budget outlays to assess whether genocide is occurring. What the United States and other countries need is the political courage to live up to their obligations as civilized nations to intervene and stop such killing wherever and whenever it takes place. But real action is much more difficult than gestures that convey the appearance that governments are doing something. I would have hoped for better.

Withdrawing from Somalia…Sort of… Maybe… Not

VOA’s Alisha Ryu in Nairobi is reporting that the Ethiopian army, which had announced it would pull out of Somalia by the end of the year, is establishing new bases in central Somalia and has yet to withdraw from key positions in the capital Mogadishu.

In recent days, Addis Ababa has hinted it would extend the deployment of its forces in response to intensified efforts by militant Islamists to take over key towns.

Ryu quotes Somali journalist Abdikarin Bulhan as saying Ethiopian troops on Monday took control of the border town of Balanbal in the northern Galgadud region and established a new base on the town's outskirts.

Bulhan says 10 truckloads of Ethiopian troops moved into Balanbal, about 15 kilometers away from the border, following reports that militant Shabab fighters had taken over Galgadud's provincial capital Dusamareb, the town of Mataban in the Hiran region, and the commercial city of Guri'el within in the past two days.

The journalist says the Ethiopians shut down businesses and cut communications in Balanbal after they took control of the town.

Further south in the Bay region, residents in the town of Burhakaba report that Ethiopian troops, armed with artillery and other heavy weapons, established a new military base there after forcing Islamist fighters to abandon the town on Sunday.

The Ethiopian foreign ministry said on Saturday that the government was willing to briefly delay troop withdrawal to allow some 3,000 African Union peacekeepers currently deployed in Somalia to take over security.

The African Union says it does not have enough troops on the ground to take over security from Ethiopia and has requested troops from the United Nations.

Meanwhile, a new report by the U.S.-based Human Rights Watch group, released on Monday, condemns all sides in the conflict for causing Somalia to descend into the worst chaos it has seen since the fall of the country's last government in 1991.

The report's author, Chris Albin-Lackey, says: "The bottom line is that Ethiopia, the transitional federal government, and insurgent forces have all managed to do more damage to the civilian population of Somalia than to one another." He goes on: "At the same time, the international community as a whole has completely failed to intervene effectively in Somalia and, in fact, a number of key international actors, including the United States, have in some cases actually made the situation worse through some of their actions. These past two years of violence and brutality are the primary reason why the extremist groups, including al-Shabab, have gained so much power."

Iran and Africa

You might recall back in September, we tried to cobble together information about Iranian interest in Africa, including the supply of military equipment to Sudan. We haven’t followed up since then but this week, there was an item on Iran’s Fars news agency which caught our attention.

It reported that Iran’s deputy foreign minister for Arab and African affairs said on Tuesday that the Islamic Republic was studying a long-term presence in the African continent.

Mohammad Reza Baqeri termed trade ties between Iran and African countries as growing. He added that Africa enjoys rich resources, adding this continent is a suitable hub for Iranian-made commodities.

Fars went on: “Referring to the recent meeting of Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki with his Sudanese counterpart Deng Alor in Tehran, he added, in the past three decades, Iranian officials have always emphasized expansion of mutual ties with African counters in all arenas. Baqeri also referred to the construction of a tractor manufacturing plant in Uganda, dispatch of Iranian physicians to South Africa and establishment of a Samand assembly line in Senegal, adding the ground is prepared for expansion of mutual ties between Iran and the African countries.”

Sudan, Uganda, South Africa and Senegal. Interesting choices.

Cruise Ship Outruns Pirates: Fun in the Sun (And Maybe We Should Arm Tourists?)

VOA is reporting today that A U.S. cruise line company said one of its ships outran pirates who tried to attack it in the Gulf of Aden.

Miami-based Oceania Cruises said the MS Nautica was sailing through the Gulf on Saturday when two small skiffs tried to intercept it.

The captain, Jurica Brajcic, increased the Nautica's speed and took evasive maneuvers. Oceania said one skiff closed to within 300 meters and fired eight rifle shots at the vessel before giving up the chase.

It said none of the ship's reported 680 passengers and 400 crew were injured.

Somalia-based pirates have hijacked several large ships in recent weeks despite increasing international patrols in the Gulf of Aden and off eastern Somalia.
Today, Ukraine's Foreign Ministry said negotiations to release a cargo ship carrying 33 Russian-made tanks are nearly complete. But there was no word on when the ship may be released.

Ministry spokesman Vasyl Kyrylych said the crew of the MV Faina is in "satisfactory" condition. The pirates holding the ship initially demanded a $35 million ransom, but they later lowered their demand to a reported $3 million.

Somali pirates have hijacked some 40 ships this year, and are currently holding about 15 ships along with their crews, including a giant Saudi oil tanker.

Kenya plans to host a regional meeting on the pirate situation December 9 in Nairobi.

Will The International Community Abandon Somalia Again?

Ethiopia has announced its intention to withdraw its forces from Somalia by the end of the year. That will leave, assuming they’re willing to stay on in the absence of the Ethiopians, about 3,000 African Union troops from Uganda and Burundi who only patrol a small area of Mogadishu. In addition, there are some NATO and other nation’s naval vessels off the Somali coast, engaged in anti-piracy missions.

Is this the signal that the international community is preparing to abandon Somalia once again? Can they afford to in light of the militant group likely to take over and the ongoing piracy controversy?

That remains to be seen. But in 1995, the UN withdrew from Somalia, ending an abortive three-year effort to promote reconciliation and restore civil order. At that time, I quoted former US Ambassador Daniel Simpson as saying:

“The world may have bitten off more than it could chew in terms of trying to bring the Somalis to a government."

He says the United Nations tried many approaches in a bid to promote peace but to no avail.

"None of them worked very well or some of them worked partly but we never really quite got there because the Somalis themselves lacked the will to form a government."

Ambassador Simpson says the world now understands Somalia better than it did before its intervention -- maybe well enough to realize that only Somalis themselves can decide their own fate.

"People who look at the Somali situation now with even a small amount of optimism operate from the premise that it may be that now that the foreigners are actually leaving Somalia, the Somalis themselves may be able to get together, close the door, inside the family and say, okay, now it's time to wrap it up and make a government."

At the time, I concluded by stating:

There is little optimism in Somalia at the moment -- and some observers fear the country may be in line for yet another convulsive outburst of violence despite the apparent war-weariness of many Somalis. And that could mean Somalia will go back to square one, back to the anarchic way things were in 1992 before the United Nations intervened. The only difference this time is that no one outside of Somalia is likely to care enough to try to come to its assistance once again.

Well, they did try again and that hasn’t appeared to work either. So what now?

VOA Correspondent Alisha Ryu in Nairobi reports the current fragile government is deeply worried about the impending Ethiopian pull-out.

Somalia's Deputy Speaker of Parliament Osman Elmi Boqore says if Ethiopian troops leave Somalia next month, the government, which depends heavily on Ethiopian forces to protect it from insurgent attacks, may cease to exist.

The deputy speaker says the Ethiopians should not leave before the deployment of a more robust African Union peacekeeping unit, which can protect the government and maintain security.

The ongoing violence has dampened enthusiasm for the deployment of several thousand more AU peacekeepers in Somalia. And a U.N. peacekeeping force called for in the Djibouti accord has yet to be formed.

Earlier this week during an interview with a local news agency, Ethiopia's Foreign Minister Seyoum Mesfin openly lashed out at Somali leaders, saying they "have shown little, or at times, no readiness to shoulder responsibility for the situation in Somalia."

A spokesman for fighters in the Islamic Courts Union, Abdurahim Isse Adow, tells VOA that while he welcomes the announcement of an Ethiopian withdrawal, he remains skeptical that it will happen.

Adow says if Ethiopian troops, who are seen as an occupying force, left Somalia, it would stop much of the violence and bloodshed in the country. But he says there is still no evidence to suggest that the Ethiopians are serious about pulling out.

General Ward Reiterates No Anti-Pirate Mission for AFRICOM

VOA’s Derek Kilner in Nairobi reports today that the head of the U.S. military's Africa Command, General William Ward, in Nairobi for meetings with Kenyan officials, discussed the piracy issue.

Ward said the United States is concerned about the rise in piracy, and is involved in multilateral efforts to provide security, but that the issue is not a primary focus for AFRICOM."The United States is participating in those activities currently, but again, that is not specifically being controlled by the United States Africa Command," he said.

Ward said AFRICOM’s main objectives involve building African military capacity and strengthening security cooperation between the United States and African countries. He said that piracy was a criminal matter, and that legal rules have to be followed in pursuing pirates. "Piracy is a very complex issue. I don't know if you would ever have enough vessels to have coverage of the entire ocean," he said.

Ward was also quoted in the report as saying that he had no evidence of ties between al-Qaida and Somali pirates, but that the possibility would be a cause for concern.

Somali Pirates Threatened by Islamists? And on the Run?

VOA Correspondent Alisha Ryu has an absolutely fascinating exclusive story from Nairobi after speaking by satellite telephone to the pirate leader aboard the hijacked Saudi supertanker. The pirate leader, who refuses to be identified, insists the vessel is still anchored off the coast of El Gaan near the central Somali town of Haradhere.

The pirate said his group has not taken the tanker from the area and they are not concerned about being attacked by the al-Shabab or by any other Islamist group. He declined to confirm reports that his group may reduce the $25 million dollar ransom demand for the release of the tanker and its 25-member crew.

A resident in Haradhere, who wished to remain anonymous because of security concerns, told VOA the pirates took the ship and headed out to sea two days ago. That ship is very far from town now, the resident said. He added the pirates fled because they feared Islamist militias were preparing to mount an assault to free the ship.

On 15 November, pirates brazenly attacked the Saudi-owned Sirius Star, a 330-meter supertanker transporting two million barrels of crude to North America. The pirates captured the ship nearly 800 kilometers off shore as it sailed toward the Cape of Good Hope.

Somali Islamist groups waging an insurgency against the country's transitional federal government and its Ethiopian backers called the hijacking a crime against Islam and have demanded the immediate release of the tanker.

The condemnation is a show of unity from an Islamist movement that has split and is now largely divided between the Islamic Courts Union, which was ousted from power by Ethiopia with U.S. support in early 2006, and the far more radical Shabab group, once the military wing of the courts. It is listed as an al-Qaida-linked terror group by the United States.

There are unconfirmed reports that dozens of Islamic courts militiamen, who control Haradhere, stormed the port last Friday to hunt for the pirates.
In recent months, Islamists have re-captured most of southern and central Somalia and are closing in on the Somali capital Mogadishu. There were hardly any acts of piracy during the six months the Islamic Courts Union was in power in 2006. Under Islamic law, piracy is punishable by death.

Still Adrift in Pirate-Infested Waters…

My eye was caught by a Los Angeles Times article today, “Grappling With A Forgotten Scourge; The modern world has different takes on how to battle piracy at sea.”

Deep in the item about the latest shenanigans of Somali pirates was a defense of the actions taken by U.S. and allied naval officials. Pentagon officials, unidentified, also said this:

“The officials said one of the principal reasons for establishing the U.S. military's new Africa Command, formally inaugurated just last month, was to combat piracy both around the Horn of Africa and in the oil-rich Gulf of Guinea in West Africa.”

Wait a minute! A principal reason for forming AFRICOM was anti-piracy? First we’ve heard of that and, besides, we recently heard it is not even AFRICOM’s mission at the moment. On Oct. 15, we posted an excerpt from a transcript posted on AFRICOM's website of a news conference by General Ward:

GEN. WARD: U.S. Central Command currently, with its allocated forces, its allocated forces conduct [counter-]piracy activities in conjunction with international partners and players in the Gulf, in the Indian Ocean. And as greater piracy policy is developed -- as there are indications that it may be happening -- again, United States in conjunction with other international partners, where within those policy directives there are military activities that fall within our geographical area of responsibility, then U.S. Africa Command would in fact be the command that would be responsible for those military activities.

QUESTION: Well, isn't what's happening along the coast of Somalia now within the purview of Africa Command?

GEN. WARD: Because of the continuity of operations, if you will -- piracy is not new. It's been going on. So as the current piracy situation that exists -- and there's one ship in particular -- because that has occurred previous to my command being a unified command, the continuity of operations, that transition, that mission is continuous Central Command for the time being.

Well, the Pentagon is unhappy about the allegations it isn’t doing enough to halt the piracy. Spokesman Geoff Morrell spoke at length yesterday in Washington. Here are some excerpts:

MORRELL: …this notion that there's inaction, out there, is just utterly false. And I also take issue with this whole notion that it's incumbent upon the armed forces of the world, the navies of the world, to solve this problem.

I mean, first and foremost, yes, we have an obligation to protect international shipping lanes. And that is our first and foremost priority. But the companies, the shipping companies also have an obligation to secure their ships, to prevent incidents such that we've been seeing, at alarming rates, over the past several months, for this year, for that matter.

Armed guards? Blackwater at sea? That rings a bell as well. See my October posting at Regrets Only.

Somali Pirates to NATO Flotilla: Catch Us If You Can

You may remember that last month NATO dispatched a multi-national flotilla to conduct an anti-piracy mission off the coast of Somalia. General John Craddock, Supreme Allied Commander Europe, said, "this response is a good illustration of NATO's ability to adapt quickly to new security challenges."

The flotilla was made up of ships from Germany, Greece, Italy, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States:

ITS Durand de la Penne (flagship, destroyer D560, Italy)
FGS Karlsruhe (frigate F212, Germany)
FGS Rhhn (auxiliary A1443, Germany)
HS Themistokles (frigate F465, Greece)
TCG Gokova (frigate G496, Turkey)
HMS Cumberland (frigate F85, United Kingdom)
USS The Sullivans (destroyer DDG 68, USA)

So why was it that this group was unable to prevent Somali pirates from seizing a supertanker? Or, given the pirates moved far from the coast of Somalia to seize the tanker, why hasn’t the task force been able to retake it or even prevent the tanker from being sailed back to Somalia from where it was taken off Kenya?

Is no one asking these questions? Or demanding answers?

Here's the latest from one of the best reporters following the pirates' activities.

A hijacked Saudi supertanker carrying two million barrels of oil is reported to have dropped anchor off the coast of Somalia. Pirates captured the vessel more than 800 kilometers off the coast of Kenya on Saturday. The company that owns the tanker says the 25 crew members are believed to be safe. As VOA Correspondent Alisha Ryu reports from Nairobi, the ship's owner is hoping to negotiate an end to the spectacular seizure.

The head of the East African Seafarers' Association in Mombasa, Kenya, Andrew Mwangura, says negotiations for the release of the $140 million oil tanker and its multi-national crew of 25 have begun. He says he expects the pirates to demand a far higher ransom for the release of the vessel than the $1.2 million the pirates have previously demanded from ship owners.

"We are informed that they are already in touch with the ship owner but we do not know who far they [negotiations] have gone," said Mwangura.

According to Mwangura and other maritime officials, the enormous weight of the cargo would have limited the 330-meter supertanker to a top speed about 14 knots - slow enough for armed pirates in fast attack boats to come alongside.

British maritime journalist David Hughes says although the newly-built Sirius Star sits higher
in the water than older tankers, it would not have been difficult for experienced gunmen to board her.

"The modern one is higher than an old one," he said. "We are talking 10 to 15 meters. Not easy. Still, you could get a ladder up."

The hijacking of the vessel, the largest ever taken by pirates, took place despite the presence of warships recently deployed by the United States, the NATO alliance and the European Union to protect one of the world's busiest shipping areas.

Many of the warships have been conducting their patrols in the narrow shipping lanes of the Gulf of Aden, where the number of successful piracy attacks on merchant ships have dropped significantly in the past month.

But Monday's attack occurred 830 kilometers off the coast of Kenya in wide open waters that navies cannot adequately cover. The United States' top military officer, Navy Admiral Michael Mullen told reporters that he was stunned by the pirates' ability to operate so far from shore.

Journalist David Hughes says the attack signals a potential catastrophe for the global maritime industry. "It means that nowhere from somewhere down the middle of the Indian Ocean and westward is safe," he said. "And that means you essentially cannot have normal merchant shipping in that huge area."

The U.S. Navy has not said whether it is considering taking military actions to rescue the tanker.

There’s A Lot of Cruelty in the World

In the second Presidential debate of this recent US election campaign, Democratic candidate and now President-Elect Barack Obama offered thoughts on whether he would intervene in a humanitarian crisis:

“So when genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening somewhere around the world and we stand idly by, that diminishes us. And so I do believe that we have to consider it as part of our interests, our national interests, in intervening where possible. But understand that there’s a lot of cruelty around the world. We’re not going to be able to be everywhere all the time. That’s why it’s so important for us to be able to work in concert with our allies.”

Is there genocide and cruelty in Africa? Obviously. Look at Darfur, at Somalia, at Congo. Look also at Jim Hoagland’s opinion column in Sunday’s Washington Post titled “An African Crisis for Obama.”

Hoagland writes:

“"never again" has become "sorry about that." Humanitarian intervention -- proudly proclaimed as a universal mission … has fallen into serious disrepair. The slaughter, looting and forced removal of defenseless Congolese civilians around the city of Goma this month -- even though they were theoretically under the protection of 17,000 U.N. peacekeepers -- are grim testimony to the consequences of making righteous-sounding promises without thinking enough about the means to carry them out.”

Now rather than knee-jerk criticism claiming AFRICOM is part of some conspiracy to re-colonize Africa and seize its resources, maybe those who are so incensed about creation of this military command ought to consider the reality of what is happening on the ground in Africa and what to do about it.

And maybe the proper debate about AFRICOM should be on whether working with allies in Africa is the most effective policy the US can pursue to help end the bloodshed.

A New Cold War Struggle for Africa?

The International Peace Operations Association recently held a meeting on "Engaging AFRICOM" in Washington, D.C. General William Ward, commander of Africa Command, provided an overview of the command and its long-term goals. The transcript is posted on the AFRICOM website.

What really caught my eye was way down low in the transcript, during a question-and-answer session:

Q: Good evening, General. I am (inaudible) from Senegal...My question, seeing Africa, as you know it, has suffered very deeply about the competition which was going on between the former Soviet Union and the United States during the Cold War. We have paid a very high price for this competition because of national interest. U.S. is being interested again to Africa, in Africa. At the time, China is also being interested in Africa. If we don’t pay attention, the same competition will lead to the very high price for African population. What do you think should be done as a political strategy to make sure that you can (inaudible) and America would be a partner for the benefit of Africa instead of being competitive at the detriment of Africa? Thank you.

GEN. WARD: That is a great question (inaudible) and thank you for bringing that up because thats another one that I get asked quite frequently. The well, first and foremost, you know, that is another one of these policy questions. And again, as I mentioned, I dont determine our policy with nations. But I will say this. Being respectful of your point with respect to the Cold War era and what went on, on the continent, it is clearly not my intention as the commander of U.S. Africa Command to engage in those sorts of activities that put the nations of Africa in between anyone.

I am also very aware that nations of Africa are engaging with other nations than just the United States in their interest as well. And I think that the in being respectful of that causes me to say that where there are common interests that are seen, that are present, then it would be certainly fine with me to engage with whoever would have those same expressed interests that are in keeping with our national interests and the interests of the nations that we would deal with in Africa regardless of who that might be.

And as we move forward with policy direction that would allow that, then we would clearly look to do our part in cooperatively working with others in pursuit of those common objectives and not to create the condition that you described that existed during the Cold War. Thank you, sir.

A Beacon of Hope for Africa and the World?

“…And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of our world -- our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand. To those who would tear this world down -- we will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security -- we support you. And to all those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright --tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from our the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity, and unyielding hope. For that is the true genius of America -- that America can change.”

That is an excerpt of Barack Obama’s victory speech after he was projected as the winner of the 2008 U.S. Presidential election.

He made no mention of Africa. But Africans rejoiced at news of his victory. Will that joy overcome the skepticism that has been voiced in past months over the intentions of AFRICOM? Does anyone believe President Obama, after taking office next January, will close down this newest U.S. military command?

I for one fear those who rejoice as well as the Afro-skeptics may have too high expectations for the son of a Kenyan who has become American President.

But they need to be realistic and keep in mind that the future of AFRICOM is hardly likely to be a top priority for an Obama administration confronting a grave economic crisis , two wars and a host of other non-African international challenges. In fact, it seems more probable that with AFRICOM in place, the Obama administration will have a tool at hand that may give it confidence African issues never rise to the level of priority crisis --- a tool that, as the President-elect said, promises support “to those who seek peace and security.”

AFRICOM HQ To Stay In Germany

Despite a flurry of reports this week about a possible relocation of AFRICOM's headquarters in the southern U.S., the American Forces Press Service is now quoting a Pentagon spokesman as saying it will remain in Stuttgart, Germany for the foreseeable future.

The decision by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates allows the newest unified command to gain greater operational experience and develop and foster relationships with both African and European partners, Bryan Whitman said.

“We certainly looked at a number of alternatives,” Whitman said. “But at the end of the day, it was determined that for now, and into the foreseeable future, the best location was for it to remain in its current headquarters.”

More at AFRICOMWatch.blogspot.com

Conflict Diamonds…Again…

PARTNERSHIP AFRICA CANADA AND GLOBAL WITNESS have issued a news release titled “LOUPE HOLES IN THE KIMBERLEY PROCESS.”

It says that as the Kimberley Process rough diamond certification scheme's fifth year draws to a close, the trafficking of conflict and illicit stones looks more like a dangerous rule than an exception. In a report released today, Global Witness and Partnership Africa Canada warn that the illicit trade in rough diamonds is one of the greatest threats facing the Kimberley Process.

"Conflict diamonds from Côte d'Ivoire are still being mined, smuggled into legitimate markets and sold to consumers on the high street, despite UN sanctions," said Annie Dunnebacke, Campaigner at Global Witness. 'The Kimberley Process' failure to address this problem in five years of existence is a serious indictment of the scheme's effectiveness."

The report's case studies highlight how the illicit trade in rough diamonds is getting worse. In Venezuela, rampant diamond smuggling continues while the government blatantly flouts the certification scheme. Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe governor Gideon Gono recently stated that over 10,000 people were visiting the border town of Mutare every month for illegal diamond mining and trading. These diamonds are then smuggled out of the country and into international trading and manufacturing centres.

"The Kimberley Process completely ignores the diamond cutting and polishing industry," said Bernard Taylor, Executive Director of PAC. "There, rough diamonds can bypass all of the KP checks. The Kimberley Process has to close this obvious loophole in the system."

Global Witness and Partnership Africa Canada are calling upon India, as current chair of the Kimberley Process, and all participants to consider the following recommendations at the upcoming Plenary meeting in New Delhi.

The Kimberley Process should:

Take swift action when faced with cases of non-compliance and agree an interim suspension mechanism with clear criteria;

Require of its participants stronger government oversight of the diamond industry, including regular stock audits of companies;

Require the cutting and polishing sector to adhere to KP minimum standards;

Require participants to improve internal controls and increase collaboration and enforcement efforts to combat rough diamond smuggling;

Develop a research and monitoring capacity to address illicit flows of rough diamonds.

U.S. Africa Command Might Be Headquartered in Southern U.S.

Over at AFRICOMWatch is a new exclusive report: AFRICOMWatch has learned defense officials are conducting what is termed a “budget-based review” of possible sites for the permanent headquarters of the Africa Command. The sites include some in the eastern United States as well as others in Europe. AFRICOM is currently headquartered on an interim basis in Stuttgart, Germany. Consideration of possible sites in Africa has generated controversy.

Pentagon sources say the review of locations is not comprehensive nor have any decisions been made. However they tell AFRICOMWatch planning for the newest U.S. military command has always assumed that a portion of the headquarters staff would not live and work in African nations, hence the study of sites in the eastern U.S. as well as Europe.

Locating the permanent headquarters in Europe offers several obvious advantages including sharing the same time zone as the United States’ main African and European military partners and betterand speedier transport connections.

On the other hand, headquartering AFRICOM in the United States has other advantages that cannot be overlooked includingsharplylower living costs and other expenses and closer proximity to the inter-governmental agency process in Washington D.C. In addition, some sources suggest there would be increased political support for the Africa Command were it located in the eastern U.S., including stronger support from African American organizations.

Pentagon sources declined to identify possible U.S. sites.

However a report in a Charleston, South Carolina newspaper last week quoted the state’s comptroller as saying the Charleston area was believed to be in the running to become the United States Africa Command headquarters.

Obama Would Be "Tougher" On Africa Than McCain?

There was recently a gathering of U.S. foreign policy experts, observers and diplomats in Addis Ababa that heard predictions that American policy toward Africa will remain more or less constant, regardless of who wins the November 4 presidential election.

Peter Heinlein of the Voice of America in Addis Ababa reported that what he termed "strong evidence" was presented to support the thesis that a President Obama might be tougher on Africa than a President McCain.

The seminar at the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, was titled: The U.S. Presidential Election and Its Implications for Africa. The conclusion: Washington's foreign policy, whether under a President John McCain or a President Barack Obama would be almost identical to that of President George W. Bush.

U.S. political scientist, Steven Ekovich, a professor at the American University in Paris, was one of the main presenters. He says a study of the Democrat and Republican platforms shows a remarkable similarity.

"I read both texts, and I had this strange impression that I read the same text twice. I read first Barack Obama's propositions for his Africa policy, then I read John McCain, and I found a few differences in nuance, but in terms of the general themes and general orientations, I had read the same text. Furthermore, I said not only have I read the same text, I've read this text before, I've seen this before. Where did I see this before because this is basically current American-Africa policy. No difference," said Ekovich.

Speaking to an audience of mainly African diplomats and intellectuals, Ekovich cautioned not to expect radical change if the man they call 'the son of Africa' is victorious.

"I think I can guess who your favorite candidate is. I think it's the favorite candidate of all Africans," he said. "I think there's a deep sympathy and attachment to Barack Obama. And therefore I think among your publics, there's a feeling if it's an African-American president, there will be a dramatic change in policy toward Africa. But I will say this, an African-American president can be tougher on you than a white president. He can give you what Americans call 'tough love'. He's going to be able to say, where another kind of president cannot say, 'You know, my African brothers and sisters are just going to have to do a better on corruption, on democracy, on reducing violence, etc. on these policy areas.' "

Professor Ekovich noted that Senator Obama has already shown a willingness to criticize African Americans for their perceived failings.

"A white guy can't say that in America, but Barack Obama could. If Barack Obama is somebody who can legitimately chastise his own African Americans, let's say there's going to be a new style in Africa policy if it's Barack Obama, but don't expect it's necessarily going to be something you're going to enjoy hearing from a President Obama," he added.

Ekovich pointed out that Senator Obama has referred to events in Sudan's Darfur region as 'genocide', and said he would work to end it. The Democrat did not hesitate to criticize corruption in Kenya during a visit to his father's homeland. And like his Republican opponent, Obama favors increasing pressure on Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, accusing him of stealing the recent election and using violence against his own people.

After hearing the presentation, Kenyan diplomat Michael Oyogi said he had concluded that Africans could expect nothing new from the presidential election, whatever the outcome.

"It means that not only the two of them but previous candidates and presidents of the U.S. would not, you would not decipher much of a change between those presidents and the one that is going to come as a result of forthcoming elections. We can conclude at this moment that the implications are zero," said Oyogi.

Participants say just the fact that this conference was held indicates an unprecedented fascination, some might say an obsession, in parts of Africa with the U.S. presidential election. It suggests that, like never before, Africans will be waking up early on the morning of November 5, or in some cases staying up all night, turning on their radios and TV sets to hear the American people's verdict.

Blackwater At Sea, Fighting Somali Pirates?

International shipping companies have welcomed the deployment of additional warships in the pirate-infested waters off the coast of Somalia, where dozens of commercial and private vessels have been attacked this year. Concerned ship owners are also reportedly hiring private security firms to escort their vessels. VOA Correspondent Alisha Ryu in Nairobi reports that having armed guards on board ships to fight piracy remains a controversial issue.

Earlier this month, the U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution calling for states to deploy naval vessels and military aircraft to fight out-of-control piracy off the coast of Somalia.

Several NATO members answered the call, dispatching frigates and destroyers to the region as part of a special anti-piracy task force focused on escorting World Food Program ships delivering aid to Somalia. The NATO group joins allied naval vessels from the Djibouti-based Combined Task Force 150, which recently created a maritime security patrol area in the Gulf of Aden to provide a safe shipping lane for about 200 vessels traveling through it every day.

Chris Trelawny at the International Maritime Organization, the U.N. agency that oversees maritime security, said the industry is relieved to know that a multi-national military effort is under way to try to tackle the piracy problem in the Horn of African region.

"We would very much expect the presence of NATO and other warships will actively prevent further attacks from occurring," he said. "But really we see the navies there as a stop-gap measure, if you like, keeping a lid on it until such time as the political situation can be sorted out by wider action through the United Nations and the African Union. "

Late last month, the hijacking of a Ukrainian freighter loaded with tanks and heavy weapons off the eastern coast of Somalia made global headlines after pirates demanded an unprecedented $20 million ransom for the release of the ship and its crew.

The director of the International Maritime Bureau in London, Pottengal Mukundan, says the capture of MV Faina demonstrated that Somali pirates now have the resources, the experience, and the weapons they need to carry out sophisticated hijackings.

Mukundan said in the past two months, pirates have attacked some of the biggest ships plying the high seas, including supertankers carrying oil and gas. He added, "They certainly seem to be going for large vessels. They think they may get higher ransoms as a result, and if they do take a vessel carrying oil or chemical cargo, then there is always a risk that the cargo may not be looked after, which may cause an accident with all the environmental consequences."

About 30 ships have been captured this year, mostly in the Gulf of Aden, which provides the shortest maritime route from the Far East to Europe and is vital to global commerce. Pirates have released about 20 vessels after the payment of ransoms that have averaged one- to $2 million per ship.

Attacks are usually conducted from several small speedboats, each carrying three-to-five pirates, armed with assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenade launchers. The latest maritime report says the number of speedboats involved in each incident is increasing, as are the number of so-called mother ships, which act as launching pads for the attacks.

The deteriorating security situation in the region has opened a window of opportunity for private security firms to offer anti-piracy services to ship owners.

Blackwater, a U.S.-based firm whose security guards were accused of killing 17 civilians last year during a shoot-out in Iraq, announced that it has sent a private military ship to the Gulf of Aden this week to assist the commercial shipping industry.

John Harris, who heads a company called HollowPoint Protective Services in the United States, said ship owners are seeking help from private security firms.

A few weeks ago, the American commander of the Combined Maritime Forces and his British deputy suggested shippers consider hiring private armed security escorts because the coalition lacked the resources to give round-the-clock protection to all merchant vessels in the region.

Harris said, "All these different governments putting their ships in there is really a good thing. But what my company can do - we put people who specialize in this field aboard these vessels and give them one-on-one protection as they go through hostile waters. We only respond to attacks on vessels we protect."

But Pottengal Mukundan at the International Maritime Bureau said there are serious legal issues to consider if armed guards are to be put on board commercial ships.

"Flagged states do not usually permit armed guards on their merchant vessels and also the fact that these vessels may be going through coastal waters of nations whose own laws may prohibit unlicensed armed guards operating. And all this could cause complications, particularly if there is death or injury. This is exactly why these legal issues need to be resolved before going down this path."

Private security firms argue that they are filling a security gap that foreign navies are unable to address. The United Nations has yet to give foreign navies guidelines on what they can and cannot do to stop acts of piracy and what to do with pirates if they are caught.

Recently, the Danish navy seized 10 suspected pirates, but had to set them free on Somali soil because the legal conditions surrounding their detention were not clear.

The Marine Director for the London-based International Chamber of Shipping, Peter Hinchliffe, said despite the limitations foreign navies face, ship owners should not hire private guards.

"Companies that are in the business of providing private security, of course, one would expect to offer those services. That is fine," he said. "But I think what navies are forgetting, and perhaps governments are forgetting as well, is that we are not talking about the protection of an individual ship in a piece of water. What we are talking about is the fundamental obligation of nations to provide safe passage for world trade. So, therefore, it is totally unsatisfactory for naval authorities to try to devolve that responsibility to innocent merchant ships."

Hinchliffe said he and many others in the industry believe that the presence of more warships, a clear set of legal rules, and more aggressive rules of engagement to deal with pirates will reduce the number of attacks and discourage piracy in the future.

US Voices Concern Over Sudan Kidnappings

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release October 21, 2008
2008/897

Statement by Sean McCormack, Spokesman

Abduction of Workers in South Kordofan State, Sudan

The United States expresses its deep concern for the well-being of nine Chinese and Sudanese workers reportedly kidnapped on October 18 in South Kordofan State. The parties responsible for the kidnapping must release the workers immediately and without harm.

The United States deplores all violence in Sudan. Such insecurity threatens all actors in Sudan – from the civilian population to international aid workers and peacekeepers to private citizens – and undermines the prospects for peace throughout the country. We express hope that an expeditious investigation will bring the perpetrators of these cowardly acts to justice.

The United States reiterates its call for the speedy deployment of the United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur as a means of stemming insecurity in Darfur. We also call upon the United Nations Mission in the Sudan to fully implement its mandate in response to such insecurity in other parts of Sudan.



# # #

In case you missed it: Chinese Oil Workers Kidnapped in Sudan

Sudanese authorities say unidentified gunmen have abducted nine Chinese oil workers in central Sudan. They say the workers were seized Saturday in Sudan's oil district of Abyei in South Kordofan state.

A diplomatic source said two Sudanese drivers were also taken, but that one of them was released and informed authorities. It was the third attack on Chinese interests over the past 12 months in the African country.

Sudanese government officials blame a Darfur rebel group, the Justice and Equality Movement, for the kidnapping, but diplomats say the captors were probably local tribesmen.

The Chinese embassy in Sudan said Sunday it has little information on the circumstances of the kidnapping, but that it is doing all it can to find the missing Chinese nationals.

South Kordofan lies in Sudan's central Nuba Mountains region, near the country's contested north-south border. Last year, rebels from Sudan's Darfur region attacked two Chinese-operated oil fields in Kordofan. The rebel Justice and Equality Movement accused China of indirectly funding the Sudanese government's war effort in Darfur through investment in Sudan's oil industry.

Eastern Congo Violence Explodes

Worldfocus correspondent Michael Kavanagh is currently reporting from the North Kivu region of eastern Congo. He is a also a journalist for the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting. Below is a selection of recent journal entries from Michael’s reporting in Goma.

His entries lead up to the intense fighting over the last couple days.

October 11, 2008: Curfew in Goma — NGOs grow anxious
I just came home from several days in the field. When I turned on my phone again, I got a text saying there was a 6 p.m. curfew for fear that UN vehicles would be attacked - at this point, it seems anyone who’s not Congolese or driving in a white 4×4 is considered U.N.

It’s becoming incredibly difficult to operate in North Kivu. It’s not just the insecurity - tensions are so high between the government and the CNDP that aid groups are having a terrible time moving across front lines. This means it’s even worse for journalists - more than ever I need the aid groups to get around but they’ve become paranoid about transporting journalists for fear of jeopardizing their access and - more importantly - the safety of their staff.

Before I move with aid workers I need to agree to a series of rules about what I can and cannot report on. This means that most of what I’m doing I can’t write about here.

October 9, 2008: Waiting for the Rwanda invasion

The Congolese Ambassador to the U.N. just told the Security Council that Rwanda invaded eastern Congo last night, and the Rwandan army is waiting along the border outside Goma, ready to take the town over. Here in Goma — where we can see Rwanda across Lake Kivu — I live about a five-minute walk from the border, and we’re drinking tea.

Blaming Rwanda is a fallback tactic for the Congolese government and army when things go wrong. It inflames nationalist sentiment and brings up memories of past Rwandan invasions — this has the added effect of turning the population against Kinyarwanda speakers in the east, particularly against Tutsis. There may be some truth to it this time - the RDF is not at the border waiting to get in (I was back and forth over the border a few times this weekend).

But it wouldn’t be out of the question for small groups of Rwanda Defense Forces (RDF) soldiers to cross the border to help the CNDP [Nkunda's National Congress for People’s Defense]. Of course, as one prominent former government minister told me yesterday, “So what, Rwanda sends a battalion. DRC has eight brigades here. It shouldn’t be a fight.”

See the special section with more of these reports on the Worldfocus website.

NATO Warships En Route to Somali Coast for Anti-Piracy Ops

NATO has announced that seven ships from six NATO navies transitted the Suez Canal on October 15, 2008, on their way to conduct anti-piracy duties and visit NATO partner nations in the Gulf region.

In response to a UN request, NATO defence ministers last week authorised NATO naval vessels to help protect World Food Programme ships carrying desperately needed supplies to conflict-ridden Somalia. This Alliance presence will also help to deter acts of piracy that continue to threaten the region.

Standing NATO Maritime Group 2 (SNMG2) already was scheduled to conduct a series of Gulf port visits and will take on the anti-piracy role off the coast of Somalia. Given the very short-notice, details of how the group will conduct the anti-piracy mission and also carry out port visits are still being finalised.

SNMG2 is scheduled to visit partners of the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

General John Craddock, Supreme Allied Commander Europe, said, "The threat of piracy is real and growing in many parts of the world today, and this response is a good illustration of NATO's ability to adapt quickly to new security challenges."

SNMG2 currently comprises ships from Germany, Greece, Italy, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States. Command of SNMG2 is assumed on rotation by contributing nations and currently is Rear Admiral Giovanni Gumiero, Italian Navy.

SNMG2 currently comprises:

ITS Durand de la Penne (flagship, destroyer D560, Italy)
FGS Karlsruhe (frigate F212, Germany)
FGS Rhhn (auxiliary A1443, Germany)
HS Themistokles (frigate F465, Greece)
TCG Gokova (frigate G496, Turkey)
HMS Cumberland (frigate F85, United Kingdom)
USS The Sullivans (destroyer DDG 68, USA)

As NATO's anti-piracy effort is formalized, the Alliance will continue to coordinate its assistance with the World Food Program, the European Union and the U.S. Led Operation Enduring Freedom who are all involved in this humanitarian and security effort.

Thwarting Somali Pirates Not A Job For AFRICOM...for the moment

From a transcript posted on AFRICOM's website of a news conference by General Ward:

GEN. WARD: Obviously piracy is something that represses development. It hinders those things that we would want to see occur from the standpoint of freedom of the seas. And so the United Nations, our government, other governments of the world have said piracy is conditions that we look to stamp out. What the command would do would not be developing what our policy would be regarding piracy. Those activities, those policy decisions are made by the policymakers.

Where within that policy direction there are military activities that would be in fact carried out, then the command, Africa Command, would in fact carry those commands out where it resides with our unified command boundaries.

U.S. Central Command currently, with its allocated forces, its allocated forces conduct [counter-]piracy activities in conjunction with international partners and players in the Gulf, in the Indian Ocean. And as greater piracy policy is developed -- as there are indications that it may be happening -- again, United States in conjunction with other international partners, where within those policy directives there are military activities that fall within our geographical area of responsibility, then U.S. Africa Command would in fact be the command that would be responsible for those military activities.

MR. DUDNEY: Well, isn't what's happening along the coast of Somalia now within the purview of Africa Command?

GEN. WARD: Because of the continuity of operations, if you will -- piracy is not new. It's been going on. So as the current piracy situation that exists -- and there's one ship in particular -- because that has occurred previous to my command being a unified command, the continuity of operations, that transition, that mission is continuous Central Command for the time being.

MR. DUDNEY: Is that a problem that goes beyond just that area around Somalia? Do you also have that problem over on the West Coast of Africa?

GEN. WARD: Not so much so. Not so much so. The nations on the west coast of Africa -- illegal fishing, control of their territorial waters. And so piracy per se is not at the same level there as it is there on the east coast of the continent. But there are clearly problems that exist, and that's why some of our programs are designed to address those concerns that the nations of the west coast have with respect to their territorial waters.

MR. DUDNEY: One other thing. Do you think that that mission now being handled by CENTCOM, is that going to transition to Africa Command shortly? I know you just stood the command up last week; but is that going to transition, or is it always going to reside?

GEN. WARD: I wouldn't say always, but I don't know when it would transition but the likelihood is greater than not that eventually those missions would transfer to Africa Command.

Top US Defense Official for Africa in Angola

According to Angola's ANGOP news agency, the US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Africa, Theresa Whelan, has been visiting the country and said Wednesday in Luanda that the US intends to deepen cooperation with Angola in the defense field.

Theresa Whelan was speaking to journalists at Luanda’s “4 de Fevereiro” International Airport, short after arriving for a two-day visit to Angola, as part of existing bilateral relations.

She added that the US wants to deepen existing cooperation that has already started in the areas of maritime security and peacekeeping in Africa.

The official also mentioned that these are the main topics that will be talked over with the Angolan authorities during her stay in the country.

Answering a question, Theresa Whelen ruled out the establishment in Angola of the US African Command (Africon). She explained that there has been a misunderstanding on the issue as the US has never requested any country to host Africon.

The official reiterated that while in Angola, she will discuss with the authorities the strengthening of relations between the two countries in the military sphere.

In his turn, the national director of International Relations of the Defence Ministry, André Mendes de Carvalho, who welcomed the US delegation, explained that the Angolan Government has never been approached on hosting the Africom.

Theresa Whelan’s programme includes a meeting with the Defence minister, Kundi Pahama. Today she was to visit the Army Headquarters, the Anthropology Museum and the Centre of Strategic Studies.