Comments on: The Conflict in the Congo is a Resource War Waged by US and British Allies

By: kalidas

kalidas — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:31:11 +0000

As in S. A., the spice must flow. And flow it will.

By: Barry

Barry — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 14:39:36 +0000

The Dem Rep of the Congo is huge – just behind war-torn Sudan in size of all African states. It is rich in minerals and hydro-power. But it is not one nation – in the sense that national feelings of being Congolese are only truly strong in Kinshasa. From Katanga in the south, which economy is oriented towards southern Africa, to the densely populated Eastern highlands, which economy is oriented towards East Africa, to the Western lowlands with its Congo River outlet on the Atlantic, there are several Congos. Several hundred languages are spoken around the country – the lingua franca of the western lowlands is often French (or Lingala), while Swahili is frequently the common tongue of commerce in the east. Congo has been engaged in civil war or under brutal authoritarian rule since it gained independence from Belgium more than five decades ago. Right from the start, the West, led by the US, and to a lesser extent, the Soviets, substantially interfered in the Congo’s politics and economics. When the early dust settled, Mobutu emerged as Congo’s dictator – and was graciously received by virtually all US Republican presidents over the several decades of brutal authoritarian rule. Congo has been subjected to – and punished – and resubjected to the economic dictates of the West – namely the IMF.

It might be that the best way for the people of the Congo to assume control over their own lives is to re-organize the entire polity at a different scale. That is to say, I think that the Congo, (against Pan-African agreements to not disturb the colonial borders) would be better off if it split up into smaller, more cohesive states. The borders of the Congo, like virtually all others in Africa, were drawn up in Berlin in the late 19th century. There is no reason these borders must hold given that the Congo has been quite unable to function as a unified polity in all its years as a state. The central government in Kinshasa has been quite unable to stave off repeated Rwandan invasions on its eastern flank. I’m not saying that any of the country should be handed over to Uganda or Rwanda or Angola. These would have to be decisions made by the Congolese people themselves.

It may be that I have not weighed all the factors sufficiently to make this leap, and I am sitting here in the US, a nation that has grossly interfered in the politics of the Congo. And I don’t know of a mechanism that could accomplish this with minimal bloodshed. And I can’t say that merely dividing the Congo on linguistic or political orientation lines is a magic bullet. It certainly would help if the Congolese could gain control of their own resources, and get a fair price in the world market for these resources, or begin to take control of processing of raw materials rather than selling them as is to the West at Western-determined prices. These problems would likely continue in the successor states as they are endemic to the world system of finance and trade. I do think though that as populated and wealthy as the Congo is, it needs to have come further in its almost 60 years. And just maybe trying to run an astoundingly diverse nation out of offices in Kinshasa is about as difficult as the Soviet Union trying to run 8 million plus square miles out of Moscow. There has to be a better way.

PS – I’d like to see the US broken up as well.

By: AaronG

AaronG — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 12:18:13 +0000

Thanks for the article, Kambale. With so much emphasis on the Middle East in recent times, for good reason, there has been little air time left for events in the Congo. I have been searching for info on the latest in the Congo. This article came at the right time.

By: Aleksandar

Aleksandar — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 06:21:35 +0000

This excellent analysis could be improved by dropping the recommendation for an international tribunal for Congo. It is shocking to see that a person so knowledgeable as the author does not recognize that it is precisely one such “international” body, the ICTR, that has done most of the damage by way of legitimizing Rwandan aggressions in eastern Congo by providing institutional support for the narrative about the alleged Rwandan “genocidaire” there that Kagame must pursue there. Consequently, the Rwandan proxy force for the US imperialism in the region ensures the plunder of coltan etc. from Congo. Another such flawed body can only spell more problems for Congo that could not possibly benefit the country. What Congo needs is less not more internationalization of her problems.

By: michael mazur

michael mazur — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 05:37:45 +0000

We don’t get to hear about the nearly 6,000,000 real dead in the Congo as that would overshadow the phony 6,000,000 phony Jewish dead of WW2.

I doubt that the Congolese would want to send me to jail if i chose to disbelieve their story – preferring no doubt to dismiss such as me as a crank and might even try to educate me, but the Jews have already sent a number of Holocaust Deniers to jail in Germany, in particular.

So, why the difference in attitude ? One Holocaust is the truth and the other a lie and it is simply world class liars jailing speakers of the truth.

If the Holocaust Lie had been exposed by the mid 90s the Congolese Holocaust could not have happened, nor could the ongoing Holocaust of the Palestinians.