GENOCIDE IN CONGO



# 052

THE HEART OF IMPERIALIST DARKNESS: WESTERN INTERESTS AND THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CONGO

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC, formerly Zaire), with a vast wealth of mineral resources, is potentially one of the richest countries in Africa. This same mineral wealth has proven attractive to foreign governments and corporations seeking riches to plunder. From the brutalities of Belgian colonialists and their US imperialist backers to the trespasses of neighbouring governments in Uganda and Rwanda, the Congo has been made a killing floor of exploitation. In Congo, various national armies and local militias, proxies of imperialist powers, have fought or are fighting over control of some of the world's largest and richest deposits of gold, diamonds, cobalt and coltan.

The death toll from the war in the DRC, which began in 1998, is higher than in any other since the Second World War, with an estimated 4.7 million killed in the last four years alone (Economist, 2003: 23). The International Rescue Committee (IRC), an aid agency based in New York, reports that the mortality rate in the Congo is higher than the United Nations (UN) rates for any other country on the planet (NewsAfrica, 2003: 6).

According to IRC President George Rupp the crisis in the Congo is "a humanitarian catastrophe of horrid and shocking proportions. The worst mortality projections in the event of a lengthy war in Iraq, and the death toll from all the recent wars in the Balkans, don't even come close" (NewsAfrica, 2003: 6). Despite these horrible facts, the crisis has gone largely unnoticed and unreported upon in the West. As David Johnson, the director of IRC operations in eastern Congo has stated: "This is the worst calamity in Africa this century, and one which the world has consistently found reasons to overlook" (quoted in Africa Today, 2003: 6).

The recent war in the Congo started in August 1998 when an uprising against the Kinshasa government of Laurent Kabila was launched in the east, backed by forces of the Ugandan and Rwandan governments (which receive their main support from imperialist "coalition of the willing" leaders, the US and Britain). The Ugandan government claimed it was defending its western borders against rebels based in Rwanda, while the Rwandan forces claimed to be defending themselves against Hutu militias on the Congo border. Apparently this border protection required Rwandan forces to occupy the diamond-rich town of Kisangani, 700 miles inside the Congolese border.

Militias were also funded by neighbouring governments hostile to the Congolese government. The conflict in Congo has over its course seen involvement from the governments, and rebels, of Angola, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi and South Africa. This has led some commentators to refer to the conflict as "Africa's World War." Along the way there has been evidence of involvement by mercenary companies including MPRI of the US, Sandline of Britain and Executive Outcomes of South Africa (Griswold and Stevens, 1999).

African countries have long been viewed by imperialist powers as sources of exploitation for the West without regard for the development of the countries in which the resources are located. The strategic industries of the imperialist countries depend on primary materials such as those found in the Congo. The metals leave Congo in their primary state of ores or concentrates and thus bring only minor returns to begin with, even without the depressed prices enforced by conditions of war.

Throughout the tumultuous periods of post-independence, Congo has remained subjected to imperialism and neo-colonialism. Imperialist interests pursuing private gain have always played a significant and sinister part in the ongoing Congo tragedy.

This article offers an investigation into the contours of contemporary imperialism through an analysis of specific economic and political interventions in Congo. The war economies, processes of balkanization and shadow state networks instituted through imperialist manipulation in Congo have much to teach about the forms of capitalist geopolitics in the age of globalization.

IMPERIALISM AND AFRICA

A detailed presentation of the various theories of imperialism is well beyond the scope of this article. Bracking and Harrison (2003: 6) note that imperialism, despite encompassing different meanings,

has almost always been a concept used to evoke critique of the global political economy: to identify the inequities of what is now called 'globalisation'; to condemn the bullying tactics of the Western states; to investigate the cultural arrogance and discursive authoritarianism of liberalism's marriage to 'freedom, equality, property and Bentham..., that is, capitalism.

A great strength of most theories of imperialism is to emphasize the central importance of exploitation, especially the extraction of value from the global South, both as a means to defuse societal rotes in the North (Biel, 2003) and to underwrite and extend regimes of accumulation.

Nkrumah (1965) earlier discussed Western intervention, political and especially economic, as neo-colonialism which he views as the most developed and most dangerous phase of imperialism. As Nkrumah has illustrated, under neo-colonialism the economic systems of nominally independent and sovereign states are controlled or directed from outside. Decades ago Nkrumah identified the US, and especially US capital, as the crucial support of the neo-colonial system.

The U.S. provided arms and/or military training to combatants in 11 of 12 recent conflicts on the continent. Other major U.S. Cold War clients, Liberia, Somalia and Sudan also succumbed to violence and economic collapse during the 1990s.

As Biel (2003: 82) notes, the specific case of US imperialism as it relates to Africa "is influenced by the special way Africa has been shaped by colonialism and imperialism as a whole: an area to be freely plundered of its resources, initially human, then increasingly minerals and cash crops. Subsequent attempts at 'modernising' imperialism often intensify these tendencies."

Ismi (2002: 14) details the stunning extent of U.S. economic and political interests in Africa: "Nearly 80% of the strategic minerals the U.S. requires are found in Africa, including 90% of the world's cobalt, 90% of the platinum, 40% of the gold, 98% of the chromium, 64% of the manganese, and one-third of the uranium." Significantly, these minerals are all indispensable components in jet engines, missiles, electronic components and iron and steel ( the raw materials of imperialist tools of conquest.

Feeding military demands of imperialism has always been as pressing as feeding economic demands. Before the Second World War most of the West's iron and steel output was based on local raw materials. After the war much of the raw materials used in these industries have been imported. The factories and industries and militaries of the West are fed by the mining production of Africa to the impoverishment of the countries of origin.

The post-war militarization of Western economies has been built on African minerals. As Nkrumah (1965: 59) noted in the 1960s: "Africa's raw materials are an important consideration in the military build up of the NATO countries." In turn military preparations have had a great impact on the demand for Africa's minerals.

With the collapse of the Soviet bloc and the re/emergence of neoliberal capitalist globalization, the scramble for African resources has once again heated up among the imperialist powers.

This renewed neoliberal scramble is already shaping up as a confirmation of Nkrumah's earlier fears: "It can be even more deadly for Africa than the first carve up, as it is supported by more concentrated interests, wielding vastly greater power and influence over governments and international organisations (Nkrumah, 1965: 109)

In the contemporary context, imperialism has come to refer to "the predominance of the United States and its militarised bullying of so many post-colonial states since 1945" (Bracking and Harrison, 2003: 6). The contemporary global system exhibits mixed characteristics of hierarchy, involving collective dominance by the North, and hegemony, specifically leadership by the US (Biel, 2003). This sense has only gathered renewed intensity since September 11, 2001 with US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and the implied threats to North Korea and Iran as part of George W. Bush's "axis of evil" (which included Iraq under Saddam Hussein's rule).

This is why imperialism is still important, it provides a far more useful starting point that globalisation to understanding Africa's relations with the global political economy. Embedded in critique, imperialism refuses to accept that bourgeois civilisation has lived up to its own historic claims of progress and well-being. As such, those who wish to imagine a politics of progress, development and popular well-being would do well to (re)engage with the concept of imperialism, both to identify and challenge the hypocrisy of metropolitan idealism and self-serving discourses of benevolence (Bracking and Hamilton, 2003: 9)

The relevance of an analysis of imperialism to contemporary situations in Africa be demonstrated by looking at specific regimes of accumulation. Bracking and Hamilton (2003) suggest that the most incisive way of using the concept of imperialism is to understand the particular contours of political and economic intervention.

CONGO: A HISTORY OF COLONIALISM AND NEO-COLONIALISM

Congo has been an important area for imperialism for a number of reasons. It is the second largest African country in terms of area, bordering nine other countries right in the centre of the continent. The country is a link between the states of the Indian and the Atlantic Oceans. DRC is home to the world's largest deposits of copper, cobalt, cadmium and coltan.

For many Westerners the Congo "has long been a symbol of Africa. The very word 'Congo' has resonance for the many Americans who never heard of most of the African states which quietly reached independence and unobtrusively went about their business" (Ferkiss, 1966: 169). Imperialist interests would not allow Congo to go about its business, since for the imperialist powers the Congo was always viewed as their business. The ongoing imperialist intervention has ensured that "increasingly the Congo became a symbol not only of bloodshed but of frustration" (Ferkiss, 1966: 169).

In few areas have Western colonialism and imperialism been so vicious and destructive as in Congo. Ismi (2001) notes that genocide and plunder have been Western policy towards the mineral-rich Congo since the 1885 Berlin Conference assigned Congo as the personal property of Belgium's King Leopold II.

Congo suffered under 115 years of Belgian colonialism and neo-colonialism. More than ten million Congolese were killed, halving the population during that period (Wrong, 2001). Under the brutal Belgian rule, millions of Congolese were subjected to torture, slavery and forced labour as the colonizers pursued the maximum exploitation of ivory and rubber from the country (Hochschild, 1998; Wrong, 2001). Workers hands were severed for not working hard enough and women were kidnapped to force their husbands to collect rubber sap (Ismi, 2001). The regimes of primitive capitalist accumulation imposed by the Belgian colonialists were so horrific that George Washington Williams, an African-American human rights activist who worked to end the atrocities in Congo, coined the term "crimes against humanity" to describe what he had seen upon a visit to the country (Hochschild, 1998; Ismi, 2001). As an eerie precursor to the present day exploitation of Congo to serve the needs of the information societies/age, Leopold's brutal predations in the Congo were driven by the newly emerging appetites of the auto age, notably the growing need for rubber for pneumatic tires.

As one commentator has noted, "the ghost of a Congo political entity which was a mask for foreign economic exploitation of Africans was born at the Free State's demise" (Ferkiss, 1966: 170). Since independence governance in the Congo has followed "the Free State formula all over again, a sham sovereignty masking rapacious white corporate interests" (Ferkiss, 1966: 170).

Congo fell within the US sphere of influence in 1960-61 after a CIA-sponsored coup which saw the murder of Patrice Lumumba, leader of the country's first elected government. The US government feared that Lumumba would take Congo into the pro-Soviet camp and President Eisenhower himself approved of Lumumba's assassination (Wrong, 2001).

Western imperialist machinations were responsible for finally installing the CIA's paid agent Mobutu in power in 1965 (Taylor, 2003). Under his dictatorship, which received ongoing US backing, Congo suffered another 37 years of terror and looting similar to what had been imposed under Belgian rule.

In the years following independence in 1960, much of the turmoil centred on the mineral-rich Katanga Province and its Western-backed secessionist government. Two major invasions of Katanga Province by opposition forces of the Congolese National Liberation Front (FLNC, Front de la Libération Nationale Congolaise) were met by interventions from outside forces in support of Mobutu: Moroccan forces in 1977 and French forces in 1978 (Taylor, 2003). Indeed outside forces were instrumental in defending the Mobutu regime from popular uprisings.

Between 1965 and 1991, Mobutu's regime received more than $1.5 billion in military and economic aid from the US (Wrong, 2001). At the same time, US multinational corporations were granted increased access to Zaire's mineral wealth.

The Western alliance with Mobutu also played a part in Cold War geopolitics. As an imperialist foothold, Zaire was used by the US as a base to launch campaigns against the nominally socialist MPLA government in Angola from its assumption of power in 1975 until Mobutu's ouster in 1997.

Eventually, Mobutu's personal pillaging of Zaire, which saw as much as 95% of the country's budget reserved for his own "discretionary spending," led to US to seek alternatives in the country which might allow even greater access for Western corporations. Especially unacceptable to imperialist interests were Mobutu's attempts to maintain state control over mining operations.

With the removal of Mobutu, outside forces have maintained a steady hold on the post-Mobutu regimes, continuing to shape the political economy of Central Africa. The manner in which imperialist forces have maintained their grip on the post-Mobutu Congo is crucial for any understanding of the political economy of contemporary Central Africa (Taylor, 2003: 47).

A MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE: WESTERN IMPERIALISM AND THE RISE AND FALL OF LAURENT KABILA

The struggles that led to the replacement of Mobutu by Kabila in some ways had the character of classical imperialist battles between competing states as described by Lenin. Laurent Kabila's rise to power came with considerable backing from North American interests. US backing of Kabila provided the opportunity "of playing the modernising card in opposition to the neo-colonial manipulation of the European powers" (Biel, 2003: 84).

In many respects, Kabila's victorious entry into Kinshasa marked out a victory for the 'Anglo-Saxons' over French interests, which had supported Mobutu until the very end. The international aspect of this supposed internal war in the Congo may be contextualised as part of the struggle between Washington and Paris for spheres of influence (and, particularly, markets) on the continent (Taylor, 2003: 49).

In March 1997, AMF's founder, Jean Raymond Boulle, signed a $1 billion agreement with Kabila's rebel forces to develop a zinc mine at Kipushi and a cobalt venture in Kolwezi. As part of these arrangements, which also included approval to sell diamonds in Shaba province, Boulle loaned Kabila a personal jet.

World Policy Institute (WPI) reports that an executive from US-based Bechtel corporation became a close advisor to Kabila, travelling the country with the rebel leader and assiting him with information to develop his war strategy (Hartung and Montague, 2001). Bechtel then had the opportunity to work with Kabila in drawing up the most complete mineralogical and geographical data ever assembled on Congo.

In early 1997 a trip by a Kabila representative to Toronto to promote investment opportunities in Congo may have raised as much as $50 million for Kabila's forces (Ismi, 2001). Among Kabila's circle of Canadian advisors was then-leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada, Joe Clark, former Canadian Prime Minister and Foreign Minister. In the mid-1990s Clark had become First Quantum Minerals' special advisor on Africa.

Once in power Kabila surprised his former allies by refusing to hand over control of Congo's mineral wealth. Kabila also retracted several mining contracts signed with US and European companies during the period of his alliance with Uganda and Rwanda, including a US$ 1 billion contract with American Mineral Fields International (AMFI), a mining company based in former US president Bill Clinton's hometown of Hope, Arkansas. He also refused to pay the huge debt to the IMF and World Bank run up under Mobutu. Kabila began to nationalize resources and allowed mining concessions to China and North Korea. "[B]y 1998, the Kabila regime had become an irritant to the United States, North American mining interests, and Kabila's Ugandan and Rwandan patrons. As a result, Rwanda and Uganda launched a second invasion of the DRC to get rid of Kabila and replace him with someone more servile" (Madsen quoted in Taylor, 2003: 50). International capital grew so frustrated with Kabila's dishonouring of contracts that he had signed with foreign businesses that some companies offered him $200 million to leave the Congo (Taylor, 2003). There is even reasonable speculation that Kabila was assassinated because he refused to concede outright control over the enormous mineral deposits, including some of the world's most significant deposits of gold, diamonds, cobalt, manganese, uranium, copper, zinc and increasingly important, coltan, a key component in cell phones and computers.

Furthermore, Kabila Sr. began constructing alliances on a private basis with both individual companies that shouldn't by rights have benefited from Kabila's emergence and, with African regimes such as Zimbabwe and Angola that were, at best, ambivalent about the encroaching Western influence in the region and at worst (Mugabe in his more excited flourishes) rabidly 'anti-Western' (Taylor, 2003: 51).

Tellingly, the new president, Kabila's son Joseph, has openly embraced neoliberal capitalist policy. One of his first acts as president was to fly to the US to give back mining concessions to companies that had had them revoked under his father's rule. In trips to Paris, Brussles, Washington and New York he has held many private sessions with top European and American business leaders. Additionally he publicly pledged during a trip to the United States to deregulate the Congolese economy, privatize major state-run companies and introduce neo-liberal investment codes in line with IMF demands.

Kabila has also met with Maurice Tempelsman, head of the US-based Corporate Council on Africa, a figure with a long and dubious history of illicit involvement in Congolese affairs, including arms and diamond trading and, who has been linked, incredibly, to the assassination of Patrice Lumumba.

WESTERN MINERAL INTERESTS

The UN Group of Experts on Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and other forms of Wealth in the Congo concluded that resource exploitation was directly responsible for the ongoing "an economy of war" in the region. Illegal exploitation of resources had established a predatory network of elites, including army and government leaders and multinational companies. Multinational companies played the crucial roles, both direct and indirect, in this situation. Indeed without the corporations the illegal mineral trade would not be possible.

The panel identified 29 companies and 54 individuals involved in "mineral rape" and human rights violations, occurring with "complete impunity." 85 multinational mining firms were accused of ignoring OECD ethics guidelines. The list included firms in violation of guidelines prepared by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) which outline acceptable business conduct for multinational companies operating or based in 33 adhering countries.

Most of the gold production in Congo comes, not surprisingly, from the northeastern parts of the country that have suffered the worst fighting of the war. The main gold exploration ventures in Congo are those of Banro, a Canadian company cited for violations by the UN Security Council, and the Anglo-American/Barrick joint venture. Barrick and Banro have both been accused of funding military operation in exchange for lucrative contracts (Ismi. 2001).

Official gold production in Congo in 1999 was 207 kg but since 1960 minimal exploration has taken place. The Kamituga-Mobale mine was producing approximately 800000 ounces per year until the start of the most recent civil war. Imperialist interests are also quite interested in the Lugushwa concession where gold production was 800 kg per year in the early 1960s. The state owned Okimo gold mine has a production capacity reported to be almost six tons of gold per year. The company signed an agreement with Barrick Gold. The Kimin Gold Mining Company, which had its activities suspended by the government has planned to raise production from 1.5 tons to 8 tons per year from gold reserves of 124 tons. During the civil wars, both Banro and the Anglo American/Barrick joint venture continued to make progress in Congo gold exploration projects. Through a settlement with the DRC government, Banro came to hold a 100% title to the Twangiza, Kamituga, Lugushwa and Namoya gold deposits, with the government retaining the tin rights.

Banro Resource Corporation, through its 93%-owned subsidiary, SAKIMA SARL, controls 10 mining permits and 47 mining concessions covering an area of 10 271 km2 in eastern Congo. After an agreement with the government of Congo, Banro came to hold 100% title to the Twangiza, Kamituga, Lugushwa and Namoya gold deposits.

South Africa's AngloGold, the world's largest gold producer, and Barrick Gold, the second largest gold producer, joined together on an exploration venture encompassing 57 000 km2 of northeastern Congo in the area along the Ugandan border which has been most severely torn by conflict. Under terms of their agreement AngloGold and Barrick Gold will each hold 40 per cent interest in the region's Kilo-Moto property with the remaining 20 per cent held by the DRC government. The agreement between the two companies established AngloGold as the manager of the joint venture properties in Congo.

Barrick had proceeded, in 1996, in getting the Gold Office of Kilomoto, the Mobutu government's monopoly, to transfer mining rights over almost all of its 82 000 km2 of land to Barrick. The area holds as estimated 100 tons of gold in reserve (Griswold and Stevens, 1999). George Bush I was instrumental in winning the Barrick deal.

First Quantum Minerals, a firm with copper-mining interests, was cited for paying government ministers to obtain mining rights. According to the report, First Quantum offered the government a $100 million (US) down payment is cash amount and shares held in trust for government officials. The payment list included the national security minister, the director of the national intelligence agency and the former minister of the presidency.

Of particular importance in understanding imperialist intentions in Congo are the interests of the mining company American Mineral Fields (AMFI). Only a month before the fall of Mobutu in 1997, AMFI signed contracts with Kabila's alliance for an investment of nearly one billion dollars in copper, cobalt and zinc mines and processing plants in Kolwezi and Kipushi (Griswold and Stevens, 1999).

AMF is an intriguing example of an international interlocutor in the Congo war which has links with the very top of Washington's political elites. Whilst it was involved in the DRC its headquarters were in Hope, Arkansas ( Clinton's hometown. It's senior stockholders comprised veteran political friends of Clinton...The link between this influential company and American foreign policy in the region is important (Taylor, 2003: 48).

Ominously the industrial enterprises set up by AMFI are also "interested in the contract for the construction of the orbital platform around the world that is destined to replace the Russian station MIR" (Baracyetse, 2000). The space platform is a centrepiece of the proposed National Missile Defence system driven by George W. Bush and his Vice President Donald Rumsfeld. Indeed, the space station cannot be built without many of the rare metals located in eastern Congo's mineral-rich Ituri province. The National Missile Defence system is projected as a $60 billion venture.

Central in the struggles for control of strategic minerals in DRC is a little-known but highly sought after mineral called columbite-tantalite or coltan. While an extremely rare mineral it is a virtually ubiquitous part of the information society. In processed form coltan is a crucial component in the manufacture of mobile phones, jet engines, night vision goggles, fiber optics and capacitors, air bags and computer chips.

Notably the end products of coltan are little used in the seven countries that were involved in the wars in Congo. These products are almost exclusively consumed in countries of the global North, with the United States being the largest consumer of electronic equipment.

Coltan miners work long hours in extremely hazardous mining conditions. Most miners sell their labour to one of the many rebel groups in the area, which in turn sell the ore directly to multinational mineral companies (Vick, 2001). Battles over control of the coltan mines is the direct cause for much of the fighting in areas surrounding the concessions. "It is capitalism in its purest form," according to Robert L. Raun, prseident of US-based Eagles Wings Resources, a company that has purchased Congolese coltan for several years. The price for a ton of coltan ranges from US$100-US$200000

PROXY IMPERIALISM: THE WEST'S STEALTH WAR IN CONGO

The US provided arms and/or military training to all seven combatants involved in the DRC conflict. The World Policy Institute (WPI) reports that of the US$19.5 million in US arms and training delivered to African armed forces in 1999, US$4.8 million went to nations involved in the war in Congo (Hartung and Monatgue, 2001). Rwanda and Uganda are the bulwarks of support for the US in the region. Human Rights Watch confirms that the US supported their forces' invasion of the Congo (see Ismi, 2002: 14).

Wayne Madsen, author of "Genocide and Covert Operations in Africa 1993-1999," testifying on the war in Congo to the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights of the United States House of Representatives, reported that:

American Mineral Fields directly benefited from America's initial covert military and intelligence support for Kabila. It is my observation that America's early support for Kabila, which was aided and abetted by U.S. allies Rwanda and Uganda, had less to do with getting rid of the Mobutu regime than it had to do with opening up Congo's vast mineral riches to North American-based and influenced mining companies (quoted in Taylor, 2003: 48).

The great weakness of left theories of imperialism, one which is illustrated in the case of imperialism in the Congo, has been the "emphasis on rivalry between the global powers and neglect for the possibility of evolving more modern, collective structures of dominance [emphasis in original]" (Biel, 2003: 77). American interest in the Congo, which has long included substantial investments, has often been hidden behind the cover of British, French, Belgian and German interests.

Britain is the largest donor to the governments of both Uganda and Rwanda apart from the US. The Blair government, which joined the United States at he forefront of the imperialist assault on Iraq, contributes £30 million per year to Rwanda but has done little to condemn the Rwandan government for their role in the slaughter (Bafalikike, 2003: 21).

Uganda received $1.5 million in US arms and military training in 1999, while in 2000 Rwanda received $325 000 through the US military training program IMET (International Military Education Training) (Ismi, 2002: 14). In addition the US Special Forces trained the Rwandan army in counterinsurgency, combat and psychological operations, with special training on fighting in Congo (Ismi, 2002: 15).

The Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) recruited and trained young men and boys from Rwanda, Uganda and eastern Zaire for the campaign against Mobutu (Taylor, 2003).

When the AFDL-CZ (Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire) and their Rwandan allies reached Kinshasa in 1996, it was largely due to the help of the United States. One reason why Kabila's men advanced into the city so quickly was the technical assistance provided by the DIA and other intelligence agencies. According to informed sources in Paris, US Special Forces actually accompanied ADFL-CZ forces into Kinshasa. The Americans also reportedly provided Kabila's rebels and Rwandan troops with high definition spy satellite photographs that permitted them to order their troops to plot courses into Kinshasa that avoided encounters with Mobutu's forces (Madsen quoted in Taylor, 2003: 49).

Ensuring the war and instability in Congo would continue, and perhaps hedging their bets, the US funded other sides in the conflict, contributing $1.4 million in training to Zimbabwe and $500 000 to Namibia. As only one example of imperialist hypocrisy, in 1999 Britain and the US vetoed Zimbabwe's annual application to the IMF for that country's involvement in the war in Congo. The veto was enacted purportedly "to stop Zimbabwe from 'indulging in those kinds of adventures', they said" (Apira, 2003: 53). On the same day that Zimbabwe's application was denied, both Uganda and Rwanda, whose forces were much bigger players in Congo, had their applications approved.

Similarly, while the British government has imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe for violating democratic rights, it continues to carry on what one commentator calls a "love affair with the Ugandan government," offering political, economic and diplomatic support (Apira, 2003: 53). This has occurred despite the fact that the Ugandan government has exceeded agreed upon limits to defence spending (African Business, 2003: 22).

Indeed the British government has "long been supportive of Kampala and Kigali's efforts to 'control' rebel forces positioned outside their borders" (African Business, 2003: 22). At the same time the British government well knows that the real motivation behind Uganda and Rwanda's interests and involvement in Congo is mineral exploitation. A subtle shift in British relations in East Africa has only been noted since news of the massacres in Ituri province, an area dominated by Ugandan forces raised some international alarm.

Western governments rewarded the Rwandan government for its efforts in the Congo plunder by doubling aid from $26.1 million in 1997 to $51.5 million in

1999, an increase that greatly expanded the Kigali government's capacities

for waging war. The World Bank also looked favourably on the policies of the Ugandan and Rwandan governments, and singled out Uganda ‘s recent economic performance for special praise, without a hint of embarrassment over the fact that much of that performance was attributable to illegal exports of gold and diamonds from Congo. The US-dominated Bank concluded that Uganda was living up to donor conditions of not spending more than two percent of the country's GDP on the military. On this basis, Uganda became the first country to be nominated for debt relief in the amount of $2 billion (Willum and Willum, 2000). In addition to being listed as a key "good example" in George W. Bush's "compact for development," initiated in March 2002, Uganda was selected as host of a US-organized regional seminar on the benefits of AGOA (Biel, 2003: 86).

At that meeting, Museveni told his sponsors exactly what they wanted to hear: 'From the beginning, I knew that the solution to Africa's backwardness was trade and not aid', while he was in turn described by the US Assistant Trade Representative for Africa as 'my hero'. For good measure, the US ambassador also offered friendly advice on how to adapt to international trade ( 'Compete or perish' (Biel, 2003: 86-87).

The UN report claimed that Rwanda and Uganda were looting and plundering eastern Congo's resources and exporting them illegally to the West. Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi are condemned in the report for "mass scale looting" which drained existing stockpiles of minerals, livestock, agricultural and forest products in the occupied zones of eastern Congo between September 1998 and August 1999. Armies from each country were cited for removing the contents of banks, factories, farms and storage facilities and transporting them out of Congo. In addition, Rwanda and Uganda extracted diamonds, gold, timber and coffee from eastern Congo and illegally shipped them to the West. In November 1998, the Rwandan army moved seven years worth of coltan stocks, almost 1500 tons, to the Rwandan capital of Kigali. Coltan exports alone brought more than $250 million to Rwanda in one 18 month period between 1997 and 1998. Despite the absence of diamond mines within their countries, both Rwanda and Uganda have increased diamond exports to the West since 1998. Between 1999-2000 Uganda exported at least $3 million worth of diamonds, while diamond dealers in Congo have provided almost $2 million per year to the Rwandan army (Ismi, 2001).

According to an anonymous World Bank source, "Uganda makes a million dollars a day pillaging gold and diamonds in Congo" (Willum and Willum, 2000). Much of the gold was sold below value to multinational corporations and exported from Uganda, ironically improving the country's balance of trade and improving its standing before the Bank. The World Bank, intent on protecting the billions of dollars invested in Uganda, chose to ignore even an IMF report that gold was being smuggled into Uganda from Congo. In fact, Uganda provided extra-budgetary financing for its military by plundering the mineral fields of the Congo.

Illegal resource extraction has allowed for the constitution of criminal cartels, formed or protected by military commanders, in occupied areas. The UN report singles out Presidents Kagame and Museveni for providing the cartels with the opportunity to organize and thrive in the area and goes on to suggest that the cartels, connected with global networks, pose the next serious security threat in the region.

The UN report notes, significantly, that the illegal plundering of eastern Congo has been facilitated by Western companies, governments, multilateral institutions and diplomats (Ismi. 2001). As one example, Coltan exports from Rwanda were carried by Sebena, the national airline of Belgium while the necessary financial transactions were carried out by Citibank (Ismi, 2001). Deals between Rwandan coltan sellers and US companies were promoted by the US Honorary Consul in eastern Congo, Ramnik Kotecha, who himself was dealing in Coltan (Ismi. 2001).

The pressing need to finance the war put the Congo government in the desperate position of offering quick, under-valued deals to mining companies over exploration rights. This made resources available much more cheaply than they would have been during peacetime conditions.

NETWORKS OF IMPERIALISM

Lenin identified as a key basis for imperialism the extensive networks of close ties and relationships involving even very small capitalists. Recent discussions of Empire have brought back a focus on the importance of networks for the working of contemporary geopolitics. The growing focus and emphasis on networks, as in recent theories of Empire, while offering insight into current developments within or against global capitalism, "also runs the peril of downplaying what is obvious to all observers: the persistent, and historically structured concentration of power emanating from the West [emphasis in original] (Bracking and Hamilton, 2003: 7). Imperialism structures relations between local governance practices and international networks of capitalist governance.

International capital's involvement in the Congo debacle was clearly being run along 'business as usual' lines, reflecting a coincidence of interests and local elites. This was very much run in a network fashion with little care for the policies and practices of the elites involved ( unless they began to encroach too much on commercial operations (Taylor, 2003: 50).

Imperialist involvement in Central Africa has given rise to and instituted a form of informal regionalism comprising a "shadow network" of states, private armies, businesses and various elites, both inside and outside of Africa. The state of disorder facilitated the emergence of new networks operating in areas where the formal state was in a process of collapse. This situation encouraged the emergence of "warlord capitalism" and a "shadow state" (or states) "which retained enough substance to negotiate with and benefit from international capital's willingness to conduct business with such entities" (Taylor, 2003: 51). Indeed some of capital prefers this condition.

It seems that it is no longer necessarily the case that presidents are dedicated to a project of establishing control over a specific recognised territory, with all the bureaucratic encumbrances and requirements to maintain some form of consensual balance...Now, the informalisation of economic and political activity can counterbalance the erosion of state capacity and power. By expanding internal and external clientistic networks, elites within conflict-ridden spaces pursue what Duffield refers to as 'adaptive patrimonialism' (Taylor, 2003: 52).

Behind imperialism in Congo, as elsewhere is the "invisible government" based on corporate connections with the Pentagon and various American intelligence services. The US government's intelligence agencies have long worked closely with the corporations seeking to exploit Congo's vast fortunes. Tellingly, the invisible government links individuals and agencies of the visible government with supposedly private business firms and institutions. A primary objective of the invisible government has long been to achieve colonialism while publicly affirming independence and freedom.

The development of such networks requires, crucially, the construction of transboundary formations. As Taylor (2003: 45) notes, "without extensive international activities and connections, the type of scenarios currently playing themselves out in the Congo would not be possible." Specifically, it is international business that has financed and sustained the participants in the conflicts in Central Africa (Taylor, 2003). The local networks can only sustain themselves through the connections they establish with major transnational firms, which, for their part, maintain political connections with powerful Western states (Bracking and Hamilton, 2003; Taylor, 2003). The involvement of transnational business and state forces "were neither peripheral nor determinative in the political trajectories of Uganda, the Congo, and the Great Lakes region in general. They were, and are, constitutive" (Latham, Kassimir and Callaghy, 2001: 2).

NEOLIBERALISM AND IMPERIALIST NETWORKS

The structural context that has nurtured the particular regional processes in the Congo has been conditioned by neoliberal globalization, notably through the imposition of structural adjustment programs in Africa (Taylor, 2003). Neoliberal globalization has encouraged the formation of the, often illicit, cross-border networks with multinational corporate linkages that have been central to the devastation in Congo. Significantly, "instead of bringing about stability and (legitimate) growth, impulses generated by globalisation have contributed to the further deepening and development of criminal networks and decidedly quasi-feudal forms of political economy" (Taylor, 2003: 52).

A couple of key points have been identified in the relationship of neoliberal approaches in Africa and the extension of Western imperialism. First among these is the extent to which "rulers of weak states who face severe internal threats and intense external pressures, are the most consistent and thorough in destroying any remaining formal institutions of state" (Taylor, 2003: 52). A focus on imperialism in Congo thus requires a rethinking of the notion of state collapse in Africa which has long been used to justify US intervention. The internal and external pressures instigated by imperialist machinations in situations like Congo have the further effect of driving the privatization regimes preferred by Western corporations and governments. Not surprisingly, "outside creditors, foreign firms, and even elites from 'stronger' neighbouring states participate in or support hard-pressed rulers' attempts to deal with political events in this unexpected fashion" (Taylor, 2003: 52). Reno (2001) suggests that the constitution of these economic linkages with networks of global capital revives aspects of the notion of "imperialism by invitation" as local elites build power through access to and control over trade with the West.

In essence, the Westphalian state system, foisted on Africa by imperialism, means that today there remains a new scramble for Central Africa, only this time by international political and economic actors anxious to secure the signature of the 'official' (as opposed to the unofficial) big man. In doing so, this new form of imperialism, interacting with local elites interests, has helped craft a distinctly unconventional form of regionalisation and may be constructing decidedly unorthodox versions of the state, one in which it is extremely unlikely that the average African will be rescued from her distress. Responsibility for such a scenario is shared, for sure, but certainly the unscrupulous activities of international capital must be blamed for stoking the fires and perpetuating further misery for the people of the DRC and beyond (Taylor, 2003: 54).

Imperialist initiatives have great bearing on state formation within the Congo. These new processes of state formation, rather than minimizing the state as neoliberal ideologues might suggest, present transformations of the state which may in fact facilitate its centralization (Bayart, Ellis and Hibou, 1999). "Structural adjustment itself is an exercise in international policing; it has created changes in the international system, for example the weakening of Southern state power giving way to a re-definition of the state itself: the 'enabling state', creating forms of governance suited to the era of globalisation" (Biel, 2003: 80).

A crucial aspect of the new arrangement has been the notion of regional political order. Favoured governments do not only conduct "governance" within their territories but act as regional powers (Biel, 2003). As part of this initiative "selective partnerships" were formed with the leaders of countries including, notably, Uganda and Rwanda. The selective partnerships recall the deployment of joint military manoeuvres and "advisors" during the cold war (Biel, 2003).

As Taylor (2003: 52) suggests, rather than representing an anomalous form of regional project, "the type of alliances and transboundary networks currently reconfiguring Central Africa may well offer a prophetic vision of what may be in store for vulnerable and peripheral areas of the world."

This is particularly so where there exist elites who are more than willing to craft shadow networks with international capital bent on the extraction of Africa's resources for private profit. Such networks are held by the local protagonists as examples of their space's integration into the global capitalist economy and of their adherence to the hegemonic neo-liberal order (Taylor, 2003: 53).

In recent years the US has looked for new means of military intervention in Africa, a process that has intensified since September 11, 2001 (Biel, 2003). The US is not necessarily looking for large-scale military base facilities since force can be deployed directly from the US (Biel, 2003). Thus much attention has been placed on increased investment in long-range deployment strategies for agile and mobile forces (Biel, 2003). This has encouraged the emergence of new forms for the relationship with military proxies. "Like military bases, direct subsidiaries of the core firm are a thing of the past, but instead the structures would be more informal. The post-September 11th discourse indeed explicitly centres upon building a network, a 'coalition of coalitions'" (Biel, 2003: 85).

Bayert, Ellis and Hibou (1999: 115) suggest that external intervention and interference are "related to the manner in which Africa is inserted in the international system through economies of extraction or predation in which many of the leading operators are foreigners whose local African partners have to a considerable degree based their careers on the use of armed force." The imperialists' preferred strategies are either to install obedient leaders or divide the area into minor enclaves, each led by leaders who can be influenced or intimidated to allow the mining companies to have their way. They hope to achieve their objectives through the dismembering of Congo and its partition into a series of microstates lacking financial resources and economic infrastructure, what might be termed a form of balkanization.

Nkrumah (1965) long ago noted that neo-colonialism is the breeding ground for the "limited wars" that have marked the last half-century. Thus neo-colonialism is a threat to world peace. Neo-colonialism undermines the formation of larger regional or continental units that would make "limited war" impossible. "Limited war" is only possible where small or weak states exist. In such cases a decisive result can be won "by landing a few thousand marines or by financing a mercenary force" (Nkrumah, 1965: xi). Neo-colonialism is based on the breaking up of formerly united territories "into a number of small non-viable States which are incapable of independent development" and must rely on an imperial power for finances, defence and internal security (Nkrumah, 1965: xiii). As Nkrumah (1965: 14) noted decades ago: "Balkanisation is the major instrument of neo-colonialism and will be found wherever neo-colonialism is practised."

The immediate benefit to neo-colonialism is that weak states can be "compelled to sell their primary products at prices dictated by the developed nations" (Nkrumah, 1965: xiv). This is especially the case where a country is subjected to an ongoing war economy as in Congo. War conditions especially benefit the imperialist powers by keeping supplies of minerals off the market and thereby increasing the prices gained for minerals controlled by the multinational mining firms. Of course Western monopolies are already favoured at the expense of poorer nations by the fact that international capital already controls the world market and the prices of commodities bought and sold.

CONCLUSION

As Biel (2003) notes, modern imperialism expresses different contradictory demands which are not easily reconciled. Among these contradictions, "the extraction of profit always tends to clash with the demand to permit sufficient local accumulation to fund a governance structure to guarantee the future extraction of profit." Again, a focus on imperialism in the Congo impels a rethinking of the notion of state collapse in Africa which has long been used by Western governments to justify military intervention. "The Southern state must still, as a rule, be relied upon for the two main tasks of political/military repression and 'enabling' the process of global capital accumulation within the country. African elites are aware of this fact, which gives them some scope for manoeuvring" (Biel, 2003: 85).

In cases of "failed states" the imperialist agenda may include the reconstitution of "new state machines" which will primarily benefit rebel groups working with Western corporations and governments (Biel, 2003). The most prominent model is probably the promotion to power by the US of Northern Alliance forces in Afghanistan. Indeed, Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz has openly confirmed this expectation with respect to finding "exactly those sorts of people" to play a similar role in Somalia (Biel, 2003).

In the Congo, US imperialism has preferred informal or illicit governance structures through proxies and militias, in effect a militarization of society and governance structures. Under the pressures of neo-liberal structural adjustment programs and imperialist invasion and occupation the state gives primary attention to developing and maintaining loyalty with security services (Richards, 1996). This then fuels the militarization of society as it "elevates the role and power of those with weapons and prioritises their needs over the wider needs of society, cultivating warlordism either in service to the incumbent who wears the thin mantle of sovereignty, or to his challengers" (Taylor, 2003: 53).

REFERENCES

Baracyetse, Pierre. 2000. "The Geopolitical Stakes of the International Mining

Companies in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Ex-Zaire)."



Bayart, J-F, S. Ellis and B. Hibou. 1999. The Criminalisation of the State in

Africa. Oxford: James Currey

Biel, Robert. 2003. "Imperialism and International Governance: The Case of US

Policy towards Africa." Review of African Political Economy. 95: 77-88

Bracking, Sarah and Graham Harrison. 2003. "Africa, Imperialism and New

Forms of Accumulation." Review of African Political Economy. 95: 5-10

Ferkiss, Victor C. 1966. Africa's Search for Identity. Cleveland: Meridian Books

Griswold, Deirdre and Johnnie Stevens. 2001. "Bush, Clinton in the Web: Behind

the Assassination of Kabila."

Hartung, William D. and Dena Montague. 2001. "The Clinton Legacy: Uplifting

Rhetoric, Grim Realities." World Policy Institute. March 22

Ismi, Asad. 2001. "Congo: The Western Heart of Darkness." Briarpatch.

November.

Ismi, Asad. 2002. "The Ravaging of Africa: Western Neo-Colonialism Fuels

Wars, Plundering of Resources." The CCPA Monitor. October: 14-17

Nkrumah, Kwame. 1965. Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. New

York: International Publishers

Reno, W. 2001. "External Relations of Weak States and Stateless Regions in

Africa." In African Foreign Policies: Power and Process, edited by G.

Khadiagala and T. Lyons. Boulder: Lynne Reinner

Taylor, Ian. 2003. "Conflict in Central Africa: Clandestine Networks and

Regional/Global Configurations." Review of African Political Economy.

95: 45-55

Vick, Karl. 2001. "Vital Ore Funds Congo's War." The Washington Post. March

19

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download