Coup attempt in Burundi almost a blueprint repeats the scenario of a failed overthrow of the rulers of African States, inspired by the CIA and various NGOs. This is the well-known scenario of “color revolutions”, is mechanically moved from Eastern Europe on African soil. But to no avail. One reason for this: the US is now repeating the same mistakes that allowed the USSR.
It is only at first glance it seems that Washington systematically undermines the situation in African countries, following a clear plan that is spelled out on paper with separate paragraphs, the due dates and names of responsible persons at the CIA. Even in the most turbulent of American foreign policy during the cold war, US policy in Africa was a chaotic set of responses to a much more active policy on the part of the Soviet Union and China. Much more painful CIA perceived what was happening in Latin America and Southeast Asia, not paying attention to everything that was happening South of the Sahara. I must say that the Soviet structure is also not reached this region. Even after the mass of the African States gaining sovereignty in the “Year of Africa (in 1960 it gained independence from 17 countries) of the Soviet Union with suspicion I was watching the “process of decolonization”. The apotheosis was sending the Soviet cruise liner with journalists (including Adzhubei) for “reconnaissance”, and at the same time and for holding, as we now say, “master class” for local. The result was a book of essays – now a rare book rare, and then almost the only politically-oriented lyrics about the process of decolonization.
“In the Soviet Union at this “inflection point” turned a blind eye, as the dominance of sectarian pseudo-Christian cults, where the icons of Christ were painted black, and the devil and demons – white and with horns”
Moscow and Beijing took the initiative, simply because in black Africa, they didn’t need to grow your own allies. The vast majority of anti-colonial movements, in a natural way came to power in African States, were in one form or another Marxist. The difference between them lies only in the extent of education-specific characters and the peculiarities of their national liberation movement. The problem was only an ideology of “Africanism”, something which turns into black racism, but in the Soviet Union at this “inflection point” turned a blind eye, as the dominance of sectarian pseudo-Christian cults, where the icons of Christ were painted black, and the devil and demons – white and with horns.
In addition, in Moscow confidently tried to ignore ethnic differences (now I repeat this mistake just the US), didn’t pay attention even at a fundamental difference, for example between Western and southern Africa, between bantuannya peoples and their restless neighbors. Impact and the complete absence of specialists in the continent, even in the academic environment it was difficult to find a professional who is familiar with the peculiarities of local life, with ethnic problems, with the languages. Such a famous institution as the Institute of Asia and Africa, was engaged in fact Africa as a residual. Some regions for Russian specialists still – dark forest and learning the local language is almost non-existent. At a later time (70s and 80s) African students, belonging to a rare ethnic groups found themselves the subject of study, not of learning. A man from the tribe of maaninka could literally interrogate the linguists and ethnologists, fishing out a songs, legends and tales. Maaninka is now one of the fastest growing languages in West Africa. And then about him only heard for the first time and in the throes of inventing writing. The only African language for which there was a real teaching methodology, was Swahili.
To say in such a situation of purposeful advocacy does not have to. But the commonality of political views (including any amendments to the local context) alike, and in all-powerful Department of the CPSU Central Committee on relations with Communist parties and labor movements in foreign countries great and terrible master of international intrigue Boris Ponomarev made the decision on friendship with any African leader, he clearly uttered the words “socialism”, “Marx”, “Lenin” or, at worst, something like “USA – macaques”. So the Soviet Union with songs and dances dragged to their camp almost the vast majority of the new States of black Africa, in spite of all concepts that were invented by former European metropolis.
Metropolis resisted in different ways. Faster democratically arranged surrendered to France and England, the longest fought authoritarian Portugal, which determined the degree of influence of the Soviet Union and China in Africa by region. More all military and financial support needed people’s liberation movement in Portuguese colonies – Mozambique and Angola. As a result, in these countries, the influence of the Soviet Union was the most powerful. Most pseudo-socialist regimes, which initially was based in Moscow, over time, more drifted in the direction of the economies of the mixed type to “Africanism”. It was a great disappointment for Moscow and led to the fact that financial and military makeup was considered the only tool to retain in its orbit disparate guerrilla or national liberation groups. So hands on was tidied up forever restless Ethiopia.
The United States woke up only when most of Africa for them was lost. However, a significant influence on its former colonies kept the UK through the Commonwealth Institute, and even in countries where there was a bloody liberation war (for example, in Kenya, where the British almost ten years chasing the Mau Mau, not yet resigned to the inevitable). But the British had many advantages: they were to some extent “local”. They maintained personal contacts, property, understand the ethnic situation and – even peculiar – to maintain its influence in some former colonies, where not reach the hand of African socialism and nationalism. In the same Kenya London managed to keep the power of one tribe – the Kikuyu – and thus safely control the whole country. But in southern Rhodesia the British faced major guerrilla armies, energized by Soviet money and weapons, and this combination is not passed. In contrast, by the way, from Northern Rhodesia, successfully turned to Zambia with quite a loyal to the former metropolis regime.
US such support in Africa did not have – and have not so far. When we are faced with total failure and “surrender” are almost the whole continent in the hands of the Communists, the CIA was doing what it skillfully then it is best – “invasive democracy.” A classic example of direct intervention in the civil war in Cabinda, the Congo, the murder of Patrice Lumumba, the strange story of the Downing of the UN Secretary-General Dag hammarskjöld. In most cases, terrorist methods by the CIA in Africa have not worked, and to establish control over at least one country, the United States and failed. It is a local defeat of the CIA in the cold war pretty much made anxiety in the American soul.
Radical conclusions from this Langley did not, and completed the crisis change ideological attitudes in the United States. The failure of the CIA from the military operations coincided with the gradual triumph of tolerance, as a result of actions of the Department fall into the same trap of false internationalism, which in its time was flounder KGB and GRU. In the United States completely ceased to distinguish the national features within African countries and conflict between them, as the contradictions between the ethnic groups and their religious peculiarities. All this was laced with contradictory attitude to South Africa to apartheid and the white government of Rhodesia. The international liberal community and actually forced the US and Britain to surrender to the mercy of fate the white governments of South Africa and Rhodesia, and while they resist – kill them with sanctions. As a result, States have excluded themselves from the struggle for these countries, and at the same time – almost for the entire southern African region.
Another fundamental error of the CIA was the genocide of the Tutsi in Rwanda. Rather, a complete lack of understanding of the issue, which showed the Western intelligence agencies, having obvious ethnic conflict, in which only written history more than a hundred years. But this was not made any conclusions – the current situation in Burundi has little to do with “struggle for democracy”. It’s the same clash of Hutus and Tutsis, only in other conditions. And how many times a President going for re-election – in terms of racial hatred does not matter. Well, now elected in Burundi, another representative of the Hutu – Tutsi from this does not become easier. Even if once again to alter the Constitution. As shown by the experience of neighbouring countries, from the massacre does not help even the fixing of quotas in Parliament for national minorities.
“The former President of South Africa Taboo Mbeki publicly denied the existence of AIDS. And then began to stigmatize whites who, from his point of view, and invented all diseases”
In the future, US policy was more determined by ideology, rather than pragmatic interests. The Soviet Union, disillusioned with the empty phraseology of the leaders of the “African socialism”, still found the strength to return to pragmatic politics, albeit built on the gratuitous Kalashnikovs. USA can’t do the same still, considering Africa as a kind of continuation of the ideological schemes, which is headed by a devout belief that global liberal values to the same extent and at any time can be forcibly introduced into any country and in any people – and everyone will be happy.
The methodology used for these purposes, no different from the one applied in Eastern Europe. Using specialized NGOs, the CIA created in one or more countries of Africa, the backbone of youth, held special trainings. Someone in the Embassy comes up with how to link to this group possessed to local realities, for example, through the sonorous slogans. After this starts already familiar to us “Maidana mechanism adjusted to local realities, i.e. with more noise, dust and screaming. It is assumed that the behavior of any African society in such circumstances, under the pressure of artificial NGOs will be exactly the same as in Serbia, Georgia and Ukraine.
But is not working. CIA efforts focused on Burkina Faso, which was supposed to turn into a strong point. There are now training sessions for groups of young people from Congo, Cameroon, Angola, Rwanda, Uganda, Central African Republic, Nigeria, Niger, Mali, Ghana, Guinea. From there they are sent to the country-“targets”, and these groups are not necessarily composed of representatives of local tribes. That is why the failed independence in the Congo, to organize it there have arrived representatives of youth NGOs from Burkina Faso, ethnically not related to the Congolese peoples. Led a failed independence employee of the U.S. Embassy in Kinshasa that the local security forces simply did not stand on ceremony and was arrested.
As the reason for such “color revolutions” with the tenacity of a maniac are used parliamentary or presidential elections. So an attempt was made to sweep in Zimbabwe in 2013, Robert Mugabe, imposing him in as Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai from the opposition. But Mugabe still won the elections simply because it relies on a basic ethnic group of the country – Sean, and its political (actually tribal) opponents from the ethnic matabele were driven almost to the reservation, walking in his time in Matabeleland with fire and sword.
A similar story happened in Kenya in the same year of 2013, when the results of the presidential election were challenged by the “street order” the Kiev scenario. But the situation is again out of control, because of the “fight for democratic values” rallies element once again escalated into inter-tribal strife, which is used to power the Kikuyu won again small coastal and highland peoples. But the pogroms and massacres had to stop already with the active participation and mediation of the Europeans.
From the point of view of the CIA is no contradiction intertribal or interracial nature of the elections simply can not exist, because it is not provided in the dominant U.S. ideology. Reality just refuses to obey: to create an ideal liberal society through countless coups, civil wars, pogroms and outbreaks of hatred and violence in any African country and failed. Some time on Central African soil itself is quite accustomed to the ideology of Maoism and other forms of “extreme leftism”. In other regions won other extreme violence – “Africanism” and religious cults of varying degrees of destructiveness. But never imposed on US from liberalism. Even the attempts of some African regimes, in the new play “ours and yours” (for example, in Angola) only resulted in inflating the economic competition between the countries concerned.
Also failed attempts to get the Europeans to focus on the humanitarian problems of the African continent, based on, again, from the liberal idea what these problems are. The fight against poverty at one time held by the IMF, strongly disagree the leaders of some African countries. They did not want to take on any obligations and, arriving at any kind of conference, began to demand from the former colonizers of money “just because”. The European pose “forever izvinyaysya” led to a new surge of African nationalism, but not already heavily involved in the anti-colonialism, namely, the rejection of everything European. If in the years of the liberation of Africa, this position was still a lot of individual leaders (mainly in French-speaking countries), now it is “anti-Europeanism” with a touch of religiosity – a common theme for most of black Africa, except in a very few countries who are very comfortable on the system of relations with the former metropolis.
The same scenario failed and an attempt to “cure all” by the European, American and canadian pharmaceutical companies. Former South Africa’s President Mbeki Taboo during the struggle against apartheid led the “Spear of the nation” – grown in the USSR, the military wing of the African national Congress, publicly denied the existence of AIDS as a phenomenon. And then began to stigmatize whites who, from his point of view, and invented all diseases, sent to the African peoples. To be treated the same, in his opinion, should not tablets, and traditional methods of shamans, which are not available white sages (in this he was actively supported by the Minister of health who denied even contraception). By the way, just recently the current President of South Africa Jacob Zuma, speaking at a scientific audience in Cape town, said that great harm to African people has caused Christianity, which brought all those white people. So, we must return to the origins of African civilization – to the ancient traditions and beliefs.
No “color revolution” is impossible in these conditions. CLA just beats the head of his own ideological schema, refusing to face the facts. They do not prepare specialists on Africa, they have not enough resources for ensuring their presence (both human and physical). But most importantly – they sincerely believe are still somewhere in the centre of Tbilisi or Kiev, even when I see the window of palm trees, giraffes and Kilimanjaro.Related posts: