Sunteți pe pagina 1din 23

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

JULY 2, 2010



Africa's Forever Wars

Why the continent's conflicts never end.

There is a very simple reason why some of Africa's bloodiest, most brutal wars never seem to end: They are not really wars. Not in the traditional sense, at least. The combatants don't have much of an ideology; they don't have clear goals. They couldn't care less about taking over capitals or major cities -- in fact, they prefer the deep bush, where it is far easier to commit crimes. Today's rebels seem especially uninterested in winning converts, content instead to steal other people's children, stick Kalashnikovs or axes in their hands, and make them do the killing. Look closely at some of the continent's most intractable conflicts, from the rebel-laden creeks of the Niger Delta to the inferno in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and this is what you will find. What we are seeing is the decline of the classic African liberation movement and the proliferation of something else -- something wilder, messier, more violent, and harder to wrap our heads around. If you'd like to call this war, fine. But what is spreading across Africa like a viral pandemic is actually just opportunistic, heavily armed banditry. My job as the New York Times' East Africa bureau chief is to cover news and feature stories in 12 countries. But most of my time is spent immersed in these un-wars. I've witnessed up close -- often way too close -- how combat has morphed from soldier vs. soldier (now a rarity in Africa) to soldier vs. civilian. Most of today's African fighters are not rebels with a cause; they're predators. That's why we see stunning atrocities like eastern Congo's rape epidemic, where armed groups in recent years have sexually assaulted hundreds of thousands of women, often so sadistically that the victims are left incontinent for life. What is the military or political objective of ramming an assault rifle inside a woman and pulling the trigger? Terror has become an end, not just a means. This is the story across much of Africa, where nearly half of the continent's 53 countries are home to an active conflict or a recently ended one. Quiet places such as Tanzania are the lonely exceptions; even user-friendly, tourist-filled

Kenya blew up in 2008. Add together the casualties in just the dozen countries that I cover, and you have a death toll of tens of thousands of civilians each year. More than 5 million have died in Congo alone since 1998, the International Rescue Committee has estimated. Of course, many of the last generation's independence struggles were bloody, too. South Sudan's decades-long rebellion is thought to have cost more than 2 million lives. But this is not about numbers. This is about methods and objectives, and the leaders driving them. Uganda's top guerrilla of the 1980s, Yoweri Museveni, used to fire up his rebels by telling them they were on the ground floor of a national people's army. Museveni became president in 1986, and he's still in office (another problem, another story). But his words seem downright noble compared with the best-known rebel leader from his country today, Joseph Kony, who just gives orders to burn. Even if you could coax these men out of their jungle lairs and get them to the negotiating table, there is very little to offer them. They don't want ministries or tracts of land to govern. Their armies are often traumatized children, with experience and skills (if you can call them that) totally unsuited for civilian life. All they want is cash, guns, and a license to rampage. And they've already got all three. How do you negotiate with that? The short answer is you don't. The only way to stop today's rebels for real is to capture or kill their leaders. Many are uniquely devious characters whose organizations would likely disappear as soon as they do. That's what happened in Angola when the diamond-smuggling rebel leader Jonas Savimbi was shot, bringing a sudden end to one of the Cold War's most intense conflicts. In Liberia, the moment that warlord-turned-president Charles Taylor was arrested in 2006 was the same moment that the curtain dropped on the gruesome circus of 10-year-old killers wearing Halloween masks. Countless dollars, hours, and lives have been wasted on fruitless rounds of talks that will never culminate in such clear-cut results. The same could be said of indictments of rebel leaders for crimes against humanity by the International

Criminal Court. With the prospect of prosecution looming, those fighting are sure never to give up. How did we get here? Maybe it's pure nostalgia, but it seems that yesteryear's African rebels had a bit more class. They were fighting against colonialism, tyranny, or apartheid. The winning insurgencies often came with a charming, intelligent leader wielding persuasive rhetoric. These were men like John Garang, who led the rebellion in southern Sudan with his Sudan People's Liberation Army. He pulled off what few guerrilla leaders anywhere have done: winning his people their own country. Thanks in part to his tenacity, South Sudan will hold a referendum next year to secede from the North. Garang died in a 2005 helicopter crash, but people still talk about him like a god. Unfortunately, the region without him looks pretty godforsaken. I traveled to southern Sudan in November to report on how ethnic militias, formed in the new power vacuum, have taken to mowing down civilians by the thousands. Even Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe's dictator, was once a guerrilla with a plan. After transforming minority white-run Rhodesia into majority black-run Zimbabwe, he turned his country into one of the fastest-growing and most diversified economies south of the Sahara -- for the first decade and a half of his rule. His status as a true war hero, and the aid he lent other African liberation movements in the 1980s, account for many African leaders' reluctance to criticize him today, even as he has led Zimbabwe down a path straight to hell. These men are living relics of a past that has been essentially obliterated. Put the well-educated Garang and the old Mugabe in a room with today's visionless rebel leaders, and they would have just about nothing in common. What changed in one generation was in part the world itself. The Cold War's end bred state collapse and chaos. Where meddling great powers once found dominoes that needed to be kept from falling, they suddenly saw no national

interest at all. (The exceptions, of course, were natural resources, which could be bought just as easily -- and often at a nice discount -- from various armed groups.) Suddenly, all you needed to be powerful was a gun, and as it turned out, there were plenty to go around. AK-47s and cheap ammunition bled out of the collapsed Eastern Bloc and into the farthest corners of Africa. It was the perfect opportunity for the charismatic and morally challenged. In Congo, there have been dozens of such men since 1996, when rebels rose up against the leopard skin-capped dictator Mobutu Sese Seko, probably the most corrupt man in the history of this most corrupt continent. After Mobutu's state collapsed, no one really rebuilt it. In the anarchy that flourished, rebel leaders carved out fiefdoms ludicrously rich in gold, diamonds, copper, tin, and other minerals. Among them were Laurent Nkunda, Bosco Ntaganda, Thomas Lubanga, a toxic hodgepodge of Mai Mai commanders, Rwandan genocidaires, and the madman leaders of a flamboyantly cruel group called the Rastas. I met Nkunda in his mountain hideout in late 2008 after slogging hours up a muddy road lined with baby-faced soldiers. The chopstick-thin general waxed eloquent about the oppression of the minority Tutsi people he claimed to represent, but he bristled when I asked him about the warlord-like taxes he was imposing and all the women his soldiers have raped. The questions didn't seem to trouble him too much, though, and he cheered up soon. His farmhouse had plenty of space for guests, so why didn't I spend the night? Nkunda is not totally wrong about Congo's mess. Ethnic tensions are a real piece of the conflict, together with disputes over land, refugees, and meddling neighbor countries. But what I've come to understand is how quickly legitimate grievances in these failed or failing African states deteriorate into rapacious, profit-oriented bloodshed. Congo today is home to a resource rebellion in which vague anti-government feelings become an excuse to steal public property. Congo's embarrassment of riches belongs to the 70 million Congolese, but in the past 10 to 15 years, that treasure has been hijacked by a

couple dozen rebel commanders who use it to buy even more guns and wreak more havoc. Probably the most disturbing example of an African un-war comes from the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), begun as a rebel movement in northern Uganda during the lawless 1980s. Like the gangs in the oil-polluted Niger Delta, the LRA at first had some legitimate grievances -- namely, the poverty and marginalization of the country's ethnic Acholi areas. The movement's leader, Joseph Kony, was a young, wig-wearing, gibberish-speaking, so-called prophet who espoused the Ten Commandments. Soon, he broke every one. He used his supposed magic powers (and drugs) to whip his followers into a frenzy and unleashed them on the very Acholi people he was supposed to be protecting. The LRA literally carved their way across the region, leaving a trail of hackedoff limbs and sawed-off ears. They don't talk about the Ten Commandments anymore, and some of those left in their wake can barely talk at all. I'll never forget visiting northern Uganda a few years ago and meeting a whole group of women whose lips were sheared off by Kony's maniacs. Their mouths were always open, and you could always see their teeth. When Uganda finally got its act together in the late 1990s and cracked down, Kony and his men simply marched on. Today, their scourge has spread to one of the world's most lawless regions: the borderland where Sudan, Congo, and the Central African Republic meet. Child soldiers are an inextricable part of these movements. The LRA, for example, never seized territory; it seized children. Its ranks are filled with brainwashed boys and girls who ransack villages and pound newborn babies to death in wooden mortars. In Congo, as many as one-third of all combatants are under 18. Since the new predatory style of African warfare is motivated and financed by crime, popular support is irrelevant to these rebels. The downside to not caring about winning hearts and minds, though, is that you

don't win many recruits. So abducting and manipulating children becomes the only way to sustain the organized banditry. And children have turned out to be ideal weapons: easily brainwashed, intensely loyal, fearless, and, most importantly, in endless supply. In this new age of forever wars, even Somalia looks different. That country certainly evokes the image of Africa's most chaotic state -- exceptional even in its neighborhood for unending conflict. But what if Somalia is less of an outlier than a terrifying forecast of what war in Africa is moving toward? On the surface, Somalia seems wracked by a religiously themed civil conflict between the internationally backed but feckless transitional government and the Islamist militia al-Shabab. Yet the fighting is being nourished by the same old Somali problem that has dogged this desperately poor country since 1991: warlordism. Many of the men who command or fund militias in Somalia today are the same ones who tore the place apart over the past 20 years in a scramble for the few resources left -- the port, airport, telephone poles, and grazing pastures. Somalis are getting sick of the Shabab and its draconian rules -- no music, no gold teeth, even no bras. But what has kept locals in Somalia from rising up against foreign terrorists is Somalia's deeply ingrained culture of war profiteering. The world has let Somalia fester too long without a permanent government. Now, many powerful Somalis have a vested interest in the status quo chaos. One olive oil exporter in Mogadishu told me that he and some trader friends bought a crate of missiles to shoot at government soldiers because "taxes are annoying." Most frightening is how many sick states like Congo are now showing Somalia-like symptoms. Whenever a potential leader emerges to reimpose order in Mogadishu, criminal networks rise up to finance his opponent, no matter who that may be. The longer these areas are stateless, the harder it is to go back to the necessary evil of government.

All this might seem a gross simplification, and indeed, not all of Africa's conflicts fit this new paradigm. The old steady -- the military coup -- is still a common form of political upheaval, as Guinea found out in 2008 and Madagascar not too long thereafter. I have also come across a few nonhoodlum rebels who seem legitimately motivated, like some of the Darfurian commanders in Sudan. But though their political grievances are well defined, the organizations they "lead" are not. Old-style African rebels spent years in the bush honing their leadership skills, polishing their ideology, and learning to deliver services before they ever met a Western diplomat or sat for a television interview. Now rebels are hoisted out of obscurity after they have little more than a website and a "press office" (read: a satellite telephone). When I went to a Darfur peace conference in Sirte, Libya, in 2007, I quickly realized that the main draw for many of these rebel "leaders" was not the negotiating sessions, but the all-you-can-eat buffet. For the rest, there are the un-wars, these ceaseless conflicts I spend my days cataloging as they grind on, mincing lives and spitting out bodies. Recently, I was in southern Sudan working on a piece about the Ugandan Army's hunt for Kony, and I met a young woman named Flo. She had been a slave in the LRA for 15 years and had recently escaped. She had scarred shins and stony eyes, and often there were long pauses after my questions, when Flo would stare at the horizon. "I am just thinking of the road home," she said. It was never clear to her why the LRA was fighting. To her, it seemed like they had been aimlessly tramping through the jungle, marching in circles. This is what many conflicts in Africa have become -- circles of violence in the bush, with no end in sight.

Save big when you subscribe to FP.

Lynsey Addario/VII

Jeffrey Gettleman is East Africa bureau chief for the New York Times.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE: Facebook|Twitter|Reddit

You might like: Who's Afraid of a One-State Solution? Postcards from Hell Why Didn't Britain Have Televised Debates Before Now? The Day the War Came Back to Moscow


If This Spy Were in D.C., Shed Be Married to John Edwards by Now

No Spending, Please, Were German

The Myth of The Palestinian Economic Miracle

Can Palin Make The Tea Party Love Defense Spending?


GRANT 1:46 AM ET February 22, 2010

All in all a good piece, wish

All in all a good piece, wish I could see something like this in the New York Times.
ANDREWMACK 11:55 AM ET February 26, 2010

Africa's Unending Wars?

Jeffrey Gettleman's 'Africa's Forever Wars' is long on anecdote and short on statisticsand its central thesis is wrong. Africa's wars DO end. As our 2008 Human Security Brief pointed out: "In the 1990s, sub-Saharan Africa was the worlds most war-torn region; in the new millennium it has become much more peaceful. Data from Uppsala Universitys Conflict Data Program show that between 1999 and 2006 the number of state-based conflicts in the region (i.e., those in which a government is one of the warring parties) had dropped by more than half. The number of battle-deaths had shrunk to just 2 percent of the 1999 tollan extraordinary decline. A [second] type of political violence involves, not combat, but the killing of defenseless civilians by governments or rebel groups. Here too there has been a positive change. Campaigns of one-sided violence against civilians declined by two thirds between 2002 and 2006; their death toll dropped by more than 80 percent. Coups detat numbers have also declined. Although sub-Saharan Africa retains the dubious distinction of being the worlds most coup-prone region, the average number of coups per year has fallen some 40 percent since the 1980s." These data are not preciseno data on wars in Africa arebut the trend over this period is not in doubt.

There is no single explanation for this remarkable change but the huge increase in international efforts to end wars and stop them from starting again is notwithstanding the many screw-upscertainly part of the answer. Andrew Mack
BROOKSINJHB 10:45 AM ET March 20, 2010

africa's unending wars

gettleman's article seems accurate to me, as far as it goes. what it leaves out is that many of these endless wars are actually about something - it just isn't what we think it should be about in 21st cent. terms. too often they are about access to resources - mineral wealth like gold, diamonds and other gemstones, koltan, uranium or timber or similar resources. moreover, the descriptions the author writes could probably be swapped with contemporary descriptions of the conditions of central europe after 25 years worth of the 30 years' war, or some other similar era/location. in fact, the author's final comments of the woman who has finally escaped from the lra could just as easily have come from the brechtian play, 'mother courage'....
MOHAIR.SAM 8:52 AM ET February 25, 2010

Pretty well nails the issues

These cultural problems that keep these conflicts aflame across the continent seem intractable to me. I see no hope for most African nations for these very reasons, short of invasion and foreign suppression of ad hoc militias (which are, as Gettleman notes, little more than bands of rapists and murderers, many of them children). Of course, any intervention from the West raises the specter of neocolonialism, which brings its own set of huge obstacles. As horrifying as it is to think about, I sometimes wonder if the best course in these cases is simply to let the populations eventually weary of brutality and conflict. Of course, that may not be realistic, either, since the incentives for doing utterly evil things far outweigh anything that can be offered as an alternative; negotiation is pointless. The problems of Congo, Somalia, Sudan, Niger, Cote d'Ivoire, Zimbabwe, et al., will have to be solved by Africans. Perhaps a healthy, prosperous example can be found in Botswana; perhaps that model can eventually be emulated by other

nations. I doubt it, though; the slow churn of mass murder, rape, etc. will undoubtedly continue indefinitely.
HOLLYEPORTER 6:52 AM ET February 26, 2010

"Gross simplification"?
There are many issues in this article that should be raised, but I limit myself to one. The LRA, we are told, is among the most disturbing examples of African unwar that has gone off track from its original legitimate grievance inspired beginnings. Joseph Kony just gives orders to burn. Much writing about the LRA displays the overpowering temptation to paint his brutality in senseless terms. This article is sadly not an exception. Serious analysis and attempts to explain might appear to excuse him, and invite accusations of being an apologist for horrifying violence. But writing him off as a maniacal gibberish speaking so-called prophet is counter-productive. Everyone I have talked to that supports or is part of the LRA seems to scream with every fiber of their being, listen to me! Many abhorrent atrocities are violent messages saying the same thing (The women Gettleman mentioned are tragically illustrative of how Kony communicates). Speeches, interviews, and reports of sermons delivered by Joseph Kony by people who have spent time in the LRA articulate the substance of spiritual, ideological and political motivations. Whether they are reasonable or not does not negate their existence. Dismissing him as the embodiment of evil or even just as a man interested only in cash, guns, and a license to rampage might be morally satisfying but it doesnt lead to policies based on solid understandings of the context. (Also, before pronouncing judgment on the relative class of rebel leaders past and present, Gettleman would do well to review research he must have on the NRAs track record with attacks on civilians and use of child soldiers. The word noble does not spring to mind.)
GRANT 4:04 PM ET February 26, 2010

On the LRA yes he does have

On the LRA yes he does have (rather convoluted) message, however it is never acted upon. In earlier ethnic or left-wing insurgencies the insurgents would govern the areas they controlled according to their beliefs, whether it was

following customs and age-old practices or a basic tax on villages and establishing law. The LRA doesn't seem too interested in following ideology.
AFRICA2010 2:39 PM ET March 9, 2010

Complicated 15 years ago

Or so. I think I agree with Gettleman's assesment that the LRA have gone far, far off track from what were legitimate Acholi grievances going back to the late 1980s - early 1990s. In analyzing this conflict it is innacurate to suggest that the LRA are the only party guilty of gross human rights violations. The UPDF shares a great deal of the burden in that regard, and indeed policies out of Kampala have done more to prolong the conflcit then see it resolved. The LRA, however, burned the bridges to any meaningful spiritual, ethnic and probably political constituency years ago. They've erroded their support to practically nil by a process of horrifying brutalization against those they claim to be fighting for. I would argue that any screams of "listen to me!" are screams of utter desperation as they scatter to Souther Sudan and Eastern DRC where, most crucially to Gettleman's argument, they murder, rape, and loot the populations there as well. The raison d'etre of the LRA in 2010 in the absence of a settlement with the Ugandan goverment, which is unlikely to be forthcoming, is survival. These days any rhetoric the LRA utters from the bush against Kampala and the UPDF (entities which deserve enormous criticism for a variety awful policies and tactics) is akin to a serial killer - or at the very least a sadistic, child raping murderer - arguing that his actions are excusable because the police force is corrupt.
ANGELO IZAMA 8:11 AM ET February 27, 2010

Clearly an outsiders view

I often find the writers style- a bit to dramatic for my taste but nonetheless- i guess it works with his audience. The thinking here- that because the writer cannot rationalise a conflict or worse several varied conflicts does not mean that no rationale- good or bad exists. Since the associated benefit of finding the drivers of [a] conflict is the opportunity to resolve them this article does little to help. Except in rare cases treating Africa like one big country- especially for understanding the intricacies of conflict that take on local characteristics is not a

good strategy either. Being Ugandan and a journalist myself who reports [ and studies] conflicts in the Great Lakes- i cannot recognise some of the arguments here. While the brutality of Joseph Kony is mindboggling- it is still a strategy if a failed one- in his attempt to project his influence beyond Acholi. He has an agenda. Plus Kony clearly is a smart strategist- having injected himself in the geopolitical conflict between Khartoum and South Sudan where Uganda is allied. Which explains why the CPA complicated his calculations and put him on the run in Congo and CAR. He may not be strong enough to takeover a government but he cannot be dismissed based only on his brutality and unconventional tactics. Northern Uganda where the rebellion ebbed and flowed is part of a complex political division - and latent ethnic rivalry between Bantu's and non-Bantus that continues to date. There are parallels here to Laurent Nkunda- and his proxy role in the political and military conflict between Kinshasa and Kigali. Anyway that said offering up these sorts of pieces gives the wrong impression about the closure on some of the more serious conflicts in the region and i do not find it particularly good journalism either. To note for example- is that in the next 30 or so months- several elections including the South Sudan referendum will take place in this region. Given the interdependent security system which links the action of governments and rebel groups over a wider geo-political area- the potential for future trouble seems likely. It will not be Kony simply continuing his brutality and mindless conflict if after January 2011- he returns to wreck havoc in an independent South Sudan on behalf of is benefactors in Khartoum. Nor will he simply be a mercenary- if the northern part of Uganda continues to feel isolated even as Uganda goes to a difficult election in the same period.
ORLANDO98 11:05 AM ET March 4, 2010

Criminal wars
I think it was Alex de Waal who compared modern wars with organised crime and its assoicated violence in Europe and the USA. Both are criminal enterprises, plain and simple.
CHEN LEE 2:16 PM ET March 12, 2010

Africa is doomed

How long until the Africans all kill each other off and we can go in to take the minerals? Maybe we can help things along :)
GK6785 3:38 PM ET March 12, 2010

Weak hypothesis
Yes there are groups in Africa that sustain conflict in order to benefit from the black markets, but it is a long leap from there to claim that insurgents no longer fight for an end goal. If you look at almost every conflict in Africa, the leaders of the movements establish goals and aims of the violence, but the foot soldiers may over step the boundaries of such aims...

the low cost of warfare...

Years ago when there was some sort of insurgency everyone would look for sponsors - the CIA, South Africa, Union Miniere, the Russians... Warfare used to be a fairly expensive business, with some control of arms flows. Now mines cost $15, automatic rifles cost about $300, and the world is awash with them. There was a South African arms buyback program 10 or 20 years ago that went broke because of all the stuff that was coming in from Mozambique. You can start an insurgency by knocking off a bank, or even a service station. Some of these insurgencies are probably economically rational - what are young insurgents giving up by turning to crime? For the most part they are not giving up jobs and a settled life. In Colombia FARC combatants live at least as well as the national police and army with money from drug dealing and extortion, and a safe and secure place for supply, r&r, and finance in Venezuela (a situation that long predates Chavez). Something like that may hold true in some parts of Africa as well. Having said that, the only groups with which I have experience are in the Niger Delta, and it does not seem right to put them in the same category as the Lord's Army. Issues in the Niger Delta could be sorted out at quite a reasonable price with over 2000 oil spills on the ground in the region there is plenty of money owed to the region and a clean up campaign would provide enough work to pacify the region. There are criminal groups in the Delta that refine stolen petroleum

and sell it on the local market, which speaks of a high level of social organization and competence The flood of arms seems largely a product of the collapse of the Soviet bloc, and maybe supplies will diminish to more rational levels of supply sometime in the near future. In the meantime, African governments may develop strategies to impose a bit of order, and be granted the resources to do so. In the best cases, we will be presented with unattractive alternatives - like rooting for Executive Outcomes in Sierra Leone in the 90s when they protected the diamond fields. Uganda and Rwanda may be imposing some command and control in the Congo that the Congolese can't impose and the "international community" won't. Before a diplomatic offensive to displace them, we should make certain that there will be a happier result. There may not be solutions to many of the contemporary wars in Africa. Apocalypse, however, is as unlikely as are resolutions. In half a lifetime in Nigeria, I've been impressed by the capacity of the largest of African societies to stumble through.
KAUTILYA 4:36 AM ET March 13, 2010

How can we tell Africans how to fight their wars?

The norm in any war is soldier v civilian. Period. Ever since Krunk figured Grunk's wife looked hot and whacked Grunk in the back of his head with a rock, war has always been soldier v civilians. Sometimes they start as soldier v soldier, but winning on the battlefield was only a prelude to the inevitable rape and plunder of the defeated before "hostilities" ceased. The "wars" outlined above are in no way specific to 21st century or Africa so spare us the moral outrage. The two exceptions, over-romanticized by Western historians mostly, and journalists a little less so, have been the American Civil War and the First World War (at least the Western Front). Virtually every war before and since has involved "civilians" to a greater or lesser degree and what is happening in Congo and the rest of Africa is, in fact, the norm.
GEOGELLER 4:25 AM ET March 14, 2010

Gangocracy - war is not war but state of mind, life style

insightful/inciteful - problem is who protects us from those who say they are protecting us - what really is the difference between Africa gangs and western gangs/gov its all about prison of fear/hope in an endless cycle - or as in the article "This is what many conflicts in Africa have become -- circles of violence in the bush, with no end in sight". we could substitute the word world or west for Africa" Africa is not a war in the conventional traditional state its a state of mind of being - its a life style like in most gangs - its about all for one and one for all and everybody else is the enemy - in the west and all over the world we have generational incarceration - generation of families continue in the family business that leads them to incarceration - food for thought - but the real question is what does this gangocracy say about us a humans as people - what will people of the future say about us today too ARVAY 1:20 PM ET March 14, 2010

First of all, defining the subject as "Africa" seems very uninformed. Kinda like talking about "Europe.' Comparing East Africans with Congolese is a bit like lumping Swedes in with Italians. Post-colonial Africa looks a lot like post Roman Empie Europe. Disorder, war, the rise of local chieftains. Te Brits lose central heating and go back to fireplaces in their huts. If the rise and supremacy of the northern European barbarians predicts anything, I'd caution my fellow pale skins to be a bit humble and apprehensive of the eventual rise of African nations. As Toynebee noted, challenges make cultures rise to the occasion. The Africans have certainly been challenged by Western colonialism. And thir response will be?
GERRI MICHALSKA 7:42 AM ET March 16, 2010

The Response to Western Colonialism?

You are way behind the times. What does all this current chaos and conflict have to do with Western colonialism? Perhaps, this is how Africa lived before Europeans ever came to

their shores. Did Africans have a history and tradition of democracy and development before Europe came to their shores? Unless and until Africa begins to establish and enforce the rule of law ruthless and uncivilized brigands will continue to wreak havoc on its poor civilian population, esp. the defenseless women and children. Niger, on the other hand, is a wonderful and present-day example of a people and army who have proudly defended and guarded their democracy!



1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Postcards from Hell The Worst of the Worst Le Scandal The Long Haul How Iran Can Build a Bomb



1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

The Long Haul The Canadian Century The BP Oil Spill Winners The Geopolitics of the iPhone Red Team

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Unfinished Business Red Team Le Scandal Caucasian Standoff Postcards from Hell



1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Unfinished Business Why the Irish Support Palestine Red Team The Canadian Century Beijing's Coalition of the Willing


Actually, those Russian spies weren't useless



Why Obama is in no particular hurry to fix immigration



Michael Oren doesn't understand what friendship means


Is al Qaeda's new English-language magazine any good?



It doesn't matter how many al Qaeda members there are



Is political science becoming irrelevant? Daily brief: Taliban district commander captured



Why Russia is being so friendly to the U.S.



See All Photo Essays

The Long Haul: Fishermen Around the World

Postcards from Hell

July/August 2010

AN FP SPECIAL REPORT The 2010 Failed States Index FEATURE Night of the Living Wonks THINK AGAIN Ronald Reagan

See Entire Issue Preview Digital Edition FP JOB BOARD

Senior Accounting and Finance Analyst... Bloomberg New York, NY (New York City) General Counsel NAACP (National HQ) Baltimore, MD (New York/Was... Vice President - Policy and Incentives Pacific Forest Trust

San Francisco, CA More Jobs > Post a Job >

Subscribe to FP Jobs by:

The Political Gabfest for July 2, 2010. Watching the World Cup in post-apartheid South Africa. Corrections from the last week.

Bad News Brings Back Specter of Double Dip Google (and Teh Gays) Can't Get a Break Pepto-Bismol Seduces Facebook

President Obama Calls Out Republicans on Immigration Reform Essence Festival Helps Keep New Orleans Afloat New Hope for Jamaica