Oil Trumps Human Rights: Ties With Equatorial Guinea Despite The Squeamishness

In mid-November 2002, American officials revealed to me that the United States planned to re-open an embassy in Equatorial Guinea despite lingering concerns over human rights abuses in the small West African nation. As I reported at the time, the move followed pressure from American oil companies who have invested heavily in the country.

A State Department official says the Bush administration's plan is to open what is described as a "small embassy" next year (2003) in Malabo, the island-based capital ofEquatorial Guinea, a small West African nation divided in two main parts: the island of Bioko and Rio Muni on the mainland.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the US official says the reason for the diplomatic move is to provide services to a growing number of American citizens, most of them oil workers in what was once the only Spanish colony in sub-Saharan Africa.

But the official also tells says that having a diplomatic presence will allow the US government to discuss with authorities in Equatorial Guinea the need to improve the human rights situation there. The country is still described by US intelligence sources as a police state with an abysmal record of human rights abuses and political repression.

[Despite the “engagement” of an embassy, things don’t appear to have changed much since. The latest US State Department Human Rights report on Equatorial Guinea states: “The following human rights problems were reported: abridgement of citizens' right to change their government; instances of physical abuse of prisoners and detainees by security forces; poor conditions in prisons and detention facilities; impunity; arbitrary arrest, detention, and incommunicado detention; harassment and deportation of foreign residents with limited due process; judicial corruption and lack of due process; restrictions on the right to privacy; restrictions on freedom of speech and of the press; restrictions on the right of assembly, association, and movement; government corruption; violence and discrimination against women; suspected trafficking in persons; discrimination against ethnic minorities; and restrictions on labor rights.”]

The United States closed its last embassy in the country in 1995, citing budgetary restrictions. Responsibility for American interests was shifted to the US Embassy in Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea's main neighbor.

But since the closure, there have been significant oil discoveries in Equatorial Guinea -- and the tiny country, with fewer than 500-thousand inhabitants, has become the fourth largest recipient of American investment in Africa, behind South Africa, Nigeria and Angola.

Official sources say those oil companies are deeply concerned about the security of their investments -- one reason they have been pressing for greater US engagement, including a formal security assistance program.

But security is one area where there are clear signs of continuing official US squeamishness in dealing with Equatorial Guinea. The Pentagon has had no military-to-military contacts with Equatorial Guinea since 1997 and US authorities have declined to sanction a private American security company's 10-million dollar plan to revamp Equatorial Guinea's entire security structure.

Instead, MPRI, a Virginia-based firm run by retired military officers, has been granted a US license only to assist Equatorial Guinea with coast guard activities. A spokesman for MPRI, which stands for Military Professional Resources Incorporated, says that as a result, the program has been essentially abandoned.

Next: More on the MPRI security plan.

P.S. I seem to recall the State Department did not openly announce the decision to reopen the embassy but only disclosed it to reporters who asked -- a strange way of doing things, in my view, and apparently a sign that State itself recognized the move was distasteful.