NOW LET'S TALK DICTATORS, REBELS, DEMOCRACY AND FOREIGN AID!

I have spent the last few months attacking the M23 rebels and their foreign sponsors and have contributed to  global awareness of the crisis in eastern Congo through this blog and on the Foreign Policy Magazine. I have not spared Joseph Kabila from criticism. For us Congolese, he still remains our headache because he bears part of the responsibility on the ongoing crisis. Put simply: if there is one thing dictators and rebels have in common, it is that both groups fit very well in the criminal category, be it in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, Uganda, etc. It is that criminal element that must be eradicated in those countries and others, period.

For those who never passed Political Science 101, I need to remind them that the current leaders of the DRC, Rwanda, and Uganda were armed rebels, i.e., criminals, and violated the laws of their own countries by promoting insurgency and participating in the killing of innocent people. Rebellion is a crime; any rebel is a criminal; any former rebel who becomes a statesman is still a criminal in Rwanda, Uganda, the DRC, etc. and must be prosecuted based on the laws he violated and not based on the laws he enacted to protect himself against prosecution. There is always a case départ !

As a democracy advocate and human rights activist, I urge those with power in world politics to use their influence and pressure to promote the cause of freedom and democracy  in the countries cited above and others across the globe and to starve to death every single dictator  and armed rebel group by freezing any direct and indirect foreign aid to dictators, their assets, and their associates' assets. Throughout the years, I have repeated this same message over and over again in meetings with Western diplomats and on the Internet. There is no other way to safeguard foreign taxpayers' money!

Much has been achieved in recent weeks in freezing the assets of the Rwanda-and-Uganda backed M23 rebels. Now is the time to focus on the foreign assets of the dictators of Africa's Great Lakes region and work towards the end of tyranny in this part of the world. This is a second test for the international community to help eliminate dictatorships and build democracies.

For those who still struggle with Foreign Policy 101, the reasoning is very simple: dictatorship, freedom, and rule of law cannot mix; they're like water and oil. No dictator can promote democracy and the only specie a dictator can turn into is that monstrous creature I once coined "dictocrat" at  the Foreign Policy Magazine. This is a weird specie that sheds its skin through fraudulent elections to camouflage its tyrannical origins and ends. Paul Kagame, Yoweri Museveni, Joseph Kabila, Paul Biya, Bozizé, etc. are just a few examples. Along the same lines, there is no such a thing as "benevolent dictator". I've heard some diplomats praise creatures such as Paul Kagame and Yoweri Museveni as benevolent dictators. They're wrong and must go back to school: these individuals and some of their peers are not only tyrants, but they also belong to what I've also coined a "new generation of African thieves". 

I am pleased that only a few countries still roll the red carpet for visiting dictators, and it is comforting that state dinners in presidential palaces to honor visiting dictators and tyrants have become a rare event  in today's world. I commend those leaders who refuse to physically associate, even on picture, with African dictators and tyrants. I urge them to move beyond  the symbolic state dinner ban and start playing a more active role towards the end of tyranny in Africa in general and in Africa's Great Lakes region in particular. A bon entendeur, salut!

WELCOME DRONES AND FOL BASE IN THE CONGO!

On November 27, 2012 and December 9, 2012, I published well-thought opinion-articles on the Foreign Policy magazine and on this blog urging the United Nations to take actions towards ending those Rwanda-fueled stupid, primitive, and stone-aged wars in eastern Congo. I also suggested, among many things, the implementation of an aerial interdiction program to fight contraband of some stolen goods from the Congo (diamonds, gold, etc.) that can easily be smuggled by air. Based on my experience in Latin America, I've  also advocated for the installation of a Forward-Location Base (FOL) to monitor eastern Congo and terminate those very stupid wars no real Mensch is pleased with!

Things have been moving in the right direction since my several political writings on this blog and on the Foreign  Policy Magazine (see my previous posts). I am pleased that the United Nations is now considering deploying drones in eastern Congo. In fact, the Boston Globe wrote on January 8, 2013, under the title UN wants to use surveillance drones in the Congo :

“(…) The diplomats said France, Britain, the U.S. and other Western countries back the deployment of drones in eastern Congo, saying it would enhance the ability of peacekeepers to track armed groups and help protect U.N. forces from ambushes. U.N. officials say drones could also be useful in other African conflicts and (…) The exploitation of Congo’s mineral resources continues to exacerbate conflict and instability on the ground.

The M23 rebel group is made up of hundreds of mainly Tutsi soldiers who deserted the Congolese army in April. A U.N. group of experts reported in November that M23 is backed by Rwanda, which has provided them with battalions of fighters and sophisticated arms, like night vision goggles (...)”

http://www.boston.com/news/world/united-nations/2013/01/08/wants-use-surveillance-drones-congo/jtDP9Vn1zHbHWJDcym6ErI/story.html

I have not been preaching in the desert, and I welcome this new move by the United Nations. We need drones and an FOL base in the Congo to fight extremists and their sponsors. It's one of the many steps that still must be taken in the right direction to protect the people of the Congo and hold accountable the suppliers (Rwanda) and recipients (M23) for their atrocities against the peaceful people of the Congo. 

Congo sits over hundreds of trillions of dollars in natural resources (see http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39986&Cr=democratic&Cr1=congo#.UO0IxxGFzkc), and we understand that undemocratic China has made huge progress securing contracts with the current government of the DRC and has made giant steps winning the hearts, minds, and souls of Congolese, building infrastructure here and there,  and engraving a new script in Congolese minds about the West and what the West stands for in the Congo. History repeating itself: winners (this time with excessive cash in hand) always rewrite history!

Now is time for Realpolitik, not a time for romanticism with an insignificant, unessential, and overcrowded piece of land perched, like a parasite, on a flank of giant Congo.  

We Congolese face our own challenges and long for and work towards a dictatorship-free Congo. Our most powerful weapon is the ability to communicate and convey a clear message to the entire world through all types of media. We do not believe in those primitive and childish wars sponsored by Rwanda in eastern Congo, and I will always applaud any initiative to eradicate those atrocities in eastern Congo and their sponsors. 

Again, I welcome the use of drones in eastern Congo to put an end to those stone-aged and stupid wars. The use of drones must be complemented with an FOL base.

THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL'S "GANG NAME STYLE"

Another year is coming to an end. Adios 2012, welcome 2013. Before kissing good bye to 2012, on December 31, the United Nations Security Council diplomats offered the civilized world their own “Gang Name Style”, the UN version of the “Gangnam Style").

In its New Year's Eve sanctions against M23 and others, the United Nations Security wrote, among many other things:

“The Mouvement Du 23 Mars (M23) is an armed group operating in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) that has been the recipient in the territory of the DRC of arms and related materiel, including advice, training, and assistance related to military activities. Several eyewitness testimonies state that M23 receives general military supplies from the Rwandan Defense Forces (RDF) in the form of weapons and ammunition in addition to materiel support for combat operations.

M23 has been complicit in and responsible for committing serious violations of international law involving the targeting of women and children in situations of armed conflict in the DRC including killing and maiming, sexual violence, abduction, and forced displacement. According to numerous reports, investigations, and testimonies from eyewitnesses, M23 has been responsible for carrying out mass killings of civilians, as well as raping women and children throughout various regions of the DRC (…)     The atrocities committed by M23 against the civilian population of the DRC, as well as M23's forced recruitment campaign, and being the recipient of arms and military assistance has dramatically contributed to instability and conflict within the region and in some instances, violated international law.”

(Full text is available at http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/sc10786.doc.htm)

UN Security Council’s “Gang Name Style” is an easy dance. This time no invisible horse is needed; rather, a rope to whip a visible criminal organization called M23 (the recipient of arms and related material, military advice, etc.) while sparing and welcoming Rwanda (the supplier) as the newest member of the UN Security Council. The audience is not 1,000,000,000 viewers; rather almost 7,000,000,000 human beings across the globe.

Now, let’s put our human brain to work. Remember my article “Africanomics 101 for Dummies”? Here’s a follow up. The relationship between a producer and a consumer is similar to the relationship between a supplier and a recipient. In both cases, dependence is the core of the association. Put in dummies’ language: there is no production without consumption and no consumption without production. Likewise, there is no supplier without recipient and no recipient without supplier. So what?  Sanctioning only the recipient is what I call “half-sanction” or “dummy sanction”. So what? Sanctioning both the supplier (Rwanda) and the recipient (M23) is what I call "intelligent sanction" if the genuine intention is durable peace and human welfare in eastern Congo.

We, Congolese, are aware of the necessity to get rid of our own dictator Kabila in a civilized and peaceful manner although he is a by-product of Rwanda’s and Uganda’s invasion of the DRC to get rid of Mobutu in 1997.  I will continue to add my voice to those who advocate for the end of tyranny in the DRC. On the other hand, and on behalf of the Congolese people, I urge the United Nations to take all measures to ensure that the governments of Rwanda and Uganda respect the civilized codes of conduct prescribed in international law and that the current government of the DRC abides by the same principles in its relations with its own people. A bon entendeur, salut!

P.S. * I published this same article on Foreign Policy Magazine at: 

http://turtlebay.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/12/31/what_does_2013_have_in_store_for_turtle_bay

** Despite my criticism, I am partially satisfied that the United Nations Security Council retook some of the language contained in Executive Order 13413 (See my December 19, 2012 posting). Executive Order 13413 is more comprehensive because it targets suppliers, middlemen, and recipients in the territory of the DRC of  arms and related material, including advice, training, etc.)

AFRICANOMICS 101 FOR DUMMIES

On December 15, 2012, I wrote an article entitled “Peacekeeping Operations and Foreign Investments for Dummies”. Since then, the United Nations Secretary-General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, acknowledged for the first time on December 19, 2012 that it was necessary to beef up the UN troops in the DRC and actively include Tanzania in the process. 

(see http://news.yahoo.com/u-n-chief-pushes-regional-deal-end-congo-200136806.html)

Also, a group of intellectuals, including Jacques Chirac, Abdou Diouf, Muhammad Ali, Robert Badinter, Leymah Gbowee, Federico Mayor, etc. issued on December 25, 2012 an open letter to the international community entitled “Au Kivu, on viole et massacre dans le silence (In the Kivu, Rapes and Massacres are Committed in Silence) condemning the Rwanda-backed M23 atrocities on the Congolese soil. They wrote among many things:  "Un drame que la communauté internationale pourrait arrêter. A l'instant. Il lui suffirait de donner l'ordre aux dix-sept mille soldats de faire leur métier et de remplir leur mandat. Leur métier de soldat. Et leur mission de garantir  la paix et la dignité de l'espèce humaine" (Translation : "A drama that the international community could stop. For now, it would suffice to order the 17,000 [United Nations] troops [in the Congo] to fulfill their duty and accomplish their mission and mandate as soldiers. And their mission is to guarantee peace and human dignity”

(see http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2012/12/25/au-kivu-on-viole-et-massacre-dans-le-silence_1810191_3232.html

http://www.leparisien.fr/international/rd-congo-jacques-chirac-et-valerie-trieweiler-se-mobilisent-en-faveur-du-kivu-25-12-2012-2433925.php

Now, I will turn to Africanomics for Dummies. To set the stage, consider Rwanda, governed by dictator Paul Kagame, who’s been running with impunity a lucrative looting and killing business in the Congo for the past 15 years.

First, Rwanda is a country that heavily relies on direct foreign aid to pay its government employees. In fact, foreign taxpayers have contributed 40% of the money needed to run the Rwandan government each year and for the last 18 years. Other governments have been reluctant to depositing money directly into Rwanda’s government’s coffers and have opted to help Rwanda through third-world golden bureaucracies known as Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs)!

Second, Rwanda’s dictator Paul Kagame has used efficiently this two-pipeline money design. This is what I call “strategic rip-off of foreign taxpayers”, which consists of a third world country’s accountable use of foreign taxpayers’ money with the sole purpose of perennial and even eternal reliance on foreign aid!

Third, every Economics 101 student knows that real economic growth is a function of economic output or production. Put simply, the more you produce to meet the demand, the more you grow. Therefore, foreign aid can only produce artificial growth, unsustainable in the middle or long run! So what? Only those who have or would have failed Economics 101 have praised Rwanda’s economic “growth” in the last 17 years!

Fourth, Rwanda’s looting of Congo’s natural resources (coltan, gold, diamonds, tin, coffee, tea, timber, etc.) has only produced artificial economic growth in Rwanda. Once the pipeline of stolen and looted goods from the Congo is shut down, Rwanda’s economy and its dictator Paul Kagame will crumble like a castle made of sand. Looting is NO production. By the way, if looting produced growth, Spain, a country that looted most of Latin America for centuries, should have been now one of the richest countries in the world! No need to read Levitt’s and Dubner’s Freakonomics! Read Jean Kapenda’s Africanomics!

Fifth, there is enough information out there to link the dots by associating the dictatorships of East Africa (Rwanda and Uganda) and Central Africa (the DRC), Rwanda-and-Uganda backed rebels groups in the Congo, and greedy and immoral foreign investors. Some of those investors have even strategically installed their businesses, including smelters in Rwanda, Uganda, Tanzania, and Kenya, to efficiently take advantage of the looted and stolen goods from the Congo! Their childish motto to justify the looting of the Congo is that Congo’s resources must serve the development of the entire region! As if Congolese have the moral obligation to bail out Rwanda, Uganda, and any other poor country of East Africa! Africanomics for Dummies!

CONGOLESE SHOULD NOT BAIL OUT RWANDA LET'S STOP THE LOOTING OF CONGO'S RESOURCES

Every day, Ben Affleck is "inspired by the resilience and the determination of the Congolese people who desperately want to live their lives in peace, earn a decent living, and raise their families just like the rest of us". (End of Ben Affleck's testimony before the House Armed Services Committee on December 19, 2012).

Things have been moving positively in recent weeks and days as the levers are being pulled on Rwandan dictator, Paul Kagame. Now is time for more pressure on every single dictator in East Africa and Central Africa to abandon their primitive and medieval lifestyles. We're fed up with seeing them act worse than animals in the 21st century!

It is time to send an even stronger message to Paul Kagame that Congolese do not have an obligation to bail out Rwanda, nor do foreign taxpayers. Some stupid and medieval minds around the world applaud Kagame's government's good use of foreign taxpayers' money. Rwanda's strategic use of foreign taxpayers money has only one purpose: to get more foreign aid and continue indefinitely to rip off the same taxpayers. However, those same paternalistic and fossilized minds erroneously believe that it is the moral obligation of foreign taxpayers to bail out dictators. They're wrong: each country has the moral obligation to bail out itself. Foreign aid must be used in limited circumstances as a reward and incentive to governments that respect human rights and are committed to democracy and the rule of law.

Rwanda has to focus on its own problems: how to get rid of their own dictator Kagame and his band of thieves and asssassins, population control (they can learn from the Chinese!), produce their own goods. What a shame that most coffee from Rwanda is actually coffee looted from the Congo and smuggled into Rwanda! Kagame's government has looted coltan, tin, gold, timber, and countless products from the Congo during the last 15 years. Uganda's dictator, Yoweri Museveni, has done the same thing.

Now, let's say: Basta! Vertig!, Enough! No more! Point Final! Congolese should not bear the burden of bailing out the economies of Rwanda and Uganda and their respective dictators. Ayn Rand would call those tyrants "the looters-by-right of Africa's Great Lakes region"!



http://www.voanews.com/content/eastern-congo-us-ben-affleck-rebels/1568328.html

WHY EXECUTIVE ORDER 13413 IS AN IMPORTANT LAW ENFORCEMENT TOOL

Executive Order 13413 (Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo) pulls the levers on a wide range of criminals. It targets all DRC and foreign criminals involved in acts of violence against the population of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.  For example, in Section 1 (E), it targets individuals who

“have directly or indirectly supplied, sold, or transferred to the  Democratic Republic of the Congo, or been the recipient in the territory  of the Democratic Republic of the Congo of, arms and related materiel, including military aircraft and equipment, or advice, training, or assistance, including financing and financial assistance, related to military activities;”

Full PDF text of Executive Order (E.O.) 13413 is available at:

  http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Documents/13413.pdf

PULLING THE LEVERS THROUGH TARGETING M23 LEADERS AND THEIR BACKERS

I applaud the sanctions targeting two M23 Leaders. The U.S. Department of  the Treasury took the right decision at the right time.  Excerpts:

"Sanctions Target Two M23 Leaders for Using Child Soldiers and Engaging in Other Activities Contributing to the Ongoing Conflict in the DRC

The U.S. Department of the Treasury today designated two senior leaders of the Congolese militant group Mouvement Du 23 Mars (M23), Baudoin Ngaruye and Innocent Kaina, pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13413, which targets persons contributing to the conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).  

Baudoin Ngaruye and Innocent Kaina are being designated for their involvement in the recruitment and use of child soldiers in the conflict in the DRC and for being leaders of a group that is impeding the disarmament, repatriation, or resettlement of combatants.  Ngaruye is also being designated pursuant to E.O. 13413 for acts involving the targeting of children in the conflict in the DRC, including through killing, maiming, and sexual violence which violate international law.  On November 30, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) DRC Sanctions Committee added Ngaruye and Kaina to its consolidated travel ban and asset freeze list. 

“M23 leaders Ngaruye and Kaina are responsible for carrying out terrible acts of violence against civilians and children in the DRC,” said Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) Director Adam J. Szubin. “We will continue to work with our partners in the international community to bring about an end to this conflict.” "

To read the full  press release from the U.S. Department of the Treasury, go to:

http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1809.aspx