Vietnam, Sudan: New Threats of Yankee War!
Note that this was translated from the French.
new threats of Yankee war!
The lesson of Iraq, where the arrogant Yankee power is getting stuck faced with the pugnacity of the ba' athist Resistance, should not be sufficient to bring the Washington hawks back to reason.
Because the Yankee imperialism prepares for new neo-colonial aggressions!
In Vietnam, where three decades after the imperialist war which devastated the country, Washington again attacks a martyred Nation, which did not recover yet from the criminal policy followed by the Pentagon, which there had largely used chemical weapons, including the famous "orange Agent".
In Sudan, where the civil war which tears this Arab state, allows that one plays us again the old well-worn air which was so useful against Yugoslavia in 1999, in connection with the Serb province of Kosovo-Metohije, on the basis of pseudo "genocide" and other "ethnic cleansing ".
In the United States, the House of Representatives indeed approved, last 19 July, a warmonger bill, one more: the "Vietnam Human Rights Act". The purpose of this text, of which the author is the Republican Christopher Smith, vice-president of the Committee on foreign relations of the Congress, is "to accelerate the process of democratization in Vietnam " (sic). It is acted in fact, to impose on this country financial sanctions like the prohibition of the non humaninatarian assistance, whose amount currently rises to 40 million dollars. An aid which comes in fact in moral compensation for the American crimes at the time of the war of the Years 60-70, which aimed at preventing the liberation and the unification of the Vietnamese Nation.
As in Yugoslavia or Iraq yesterday, as in Syria or Libya today, the economic sanctions are an instrument of war intended to destroy a political system opposed to the USA.
And here also, these sanctions are accompanied by measures of financing intended to set up a puppet opposition prostituted to the Americans, by the granting of "an envelope of 4 million dollars to the Vietnamese organizations residing abroad and associations which seek to promote the democracy in Vietnam ", as specified by the daily newspaper LAO DONG.
Washington strikes Vietnam whereas it did not repair yet the damage which it inflicted to these martyred people. At the moment when Washington gives lessons of morality, the current events indeed point out to us the atrocities of the chemical Yankee war in Indo-China : newspaper LAO DONG reports that "three Vietnamese victims suffering from an intoxication to dioxane related to a chemical weapon used by the American army during the Vietnam war sue before the American justice the multinationals responsible for the development of this weapon, a defoliant known under the name of" orange agent ". Let us recall that the orange agent killed several hundreds of thousands of people, and approximately 3 million Vietnameses would have been affected by dioxane.
If prompt to require repairs - that one remembers Libya -, the USA is conversely not very inclined to pay for its crimes. In 2001, the United States and Vietnam concluded an agreement to begin joint scientific research. But the Americans systematically avoided the debate about the compensation of the Vietnamese victims.
In Sudan, it is the civil war which divides in an endemic way this country, an Arab and Moslem State, but whose South shelters a strong Christian minority, since four decades, which the Yankees are on the point of serving as a pretext for their intervention.
The UN, which one will never denounce enough its control and instrumentalisation by the USA, claims that the Sudanese province of Darfur undergoes the "worst current humanitarian crisis in the world", which would be caused by the conflict between pro-government Arab militia - the Janjaweed militia — and two local rebellions, which denounce the "marginalisation " of their region.
But, the Sudanese minister Mustafa Osman disputes that the conflict opposes Moslem Arabs and Blacks. Moreover, the Sudanese authorities contradicted that a genocide is under way in the Western region of Darfur.
A few days ago however, the Congress of the United States adopted a Resolution denouncing a "genocide perpetrated by Arab militia against the black population".
In reaction to this Resolution, Mustafa Osman Ismaïl, the head of the Sudanese diplomacy, recalled that, for the African Union, it is by no means about a genocide and that "serious efforts " to rectify the situation were made, allowing to obtain progress in matters of safety and humanitarian aid: "More than one hundred members of the Janjaweed militia were stopped ", he ensures "what we do is right, and we will continue to do it." Thierry Allafort-Duverger, of MSF, in a discussion with LE FIGARO, precises as for him that it is about " a humanitarian drama but not a genocide ". He adds that "the reasons which pushed the American MP's are delicate and there are undoubtedly reasons of domestic policy. For us, by looking at the analyses and the facts, there is no genocide under way in Darfur. There is tendency nowadays to overuse this term and a propagandist distortion is taking place which can only harm the aid ".
However, since mid-July, the Western capitals increased the pressure on Khartoum, referring to the possibility of a military intervention to face the humanitarian situation in Darfur. Great Britain and Australia - the faithful Anglo-Saxon servants of Washington - declared themselves ready to send troops.
The Foreign Ministers of the European Union, once more a satellite of Washington, meeting this 26 July in Brussels, "invited UNO to hold up the threat of sanctions if Khartoum quickly does not fulfill its obligations to disarm the militia accused of perpetrating exactions in Darfur ".
In spite of this threat, Sudan required of the Libyan number one, colonel Moammar Gaddafi, who became the wise man of Africa and the specialist in the resolution of this kind of conflicts on the black continent, to sponsor peace negotiations on Darfur. However, the two rebellious groups of Darfur, the MJE and the MLS, left the Ethiopian capital after their refusal to start direct negotiations as long as the Sudanese government will not have agreed to concretize their requests, in particular related on the demilitarization of Darfur and the bringing of the war criminals before the courts.
Libya, spearhead of the African Unity and independence, is "hostile to any non African military presence in Darfur ", as has just pointed out the head of the Libyan diplomacy Abdelrahmane Chalgham. Darfur, let us specify, is a Sudanese frontier region of Libya.
Abdelrahmane Chalgham stated that the crisis of Darfur was "very dangerous " and criticized "the escalation in the American and Western speeches " about this region. "We refuse any foreign military presence over there (in Darfur), out of the framework of the African Union (AU) ", as said Mr. Chalgham at the time of a press conference in Tripoli, informing that a deployment of foreign troops in this region would make the situation "explosive ". He added to have said to the assistant of the Sudanese President Omar Al-Bechir, Mubarak Al-Fadil Al-Mahdi, that it "is for the African Union to play a central role in (a regulation of) the crisis "..
Observers of the AU are already deployed in the region of Darfur, which covers three States of the Sudanese west, to supervise the fragile cease-fire concluded by the belligerents. The AU had sponsored negotiations in Addis Ababa between Khartoum and the rebels of Darfur, but the belligerents separated on July 18 without result.
A Western intervention would amount to send not firemen but arsonists. A situation already seen in Kosovo since 1999.
In the backdrop of the Darfur crisis , there is the American presidential election. "In full election campaign, George Bush cannot let himself show indifference" points out LE FIGARO, this is why the Bush administration, submissive to the pressure of the Congress, which adopted unanimously, last week, a Resolution qualifying of "genocide" the atrocities done in Darfur against the civil population, is prepared to act, including, possibly, in a "unilateral" way. "
But the Sudanese crisis, artificially exaggerated by Washington and its political servants and Western media, is not explained solely by the gesticulations caused by the American presidential election.
It has also and especially as a backdrop Oil, the mining wealth of Sudan and the threatened interests of Western multinationals.
As the "Communist Party of Sudan " pointed out recently in a statement: "export of oil, gold and other ores made of Sudan one of the regions where takes place an international conflict of which oil and other raw material are the issue. American monopolies saw with concern the entry of China and Malaysia on the Sudanese oil market , which was previously dominated by the American society Chevron . After the events of September 11, 2001 and the participation of the government of the national Islamic Front with the American war "against terrorism", the American monopolies prepare to turn over towards the Sudanese market . That belongs to their plan of domination of African oil , from Chad to Angola, while passing by the Great Lakes. It is why the United States took the initiative to stop the war in Sudan and to stabilize the oil region in the south of our country. The "democracy " and " democratic reforms" were only a matter of second order. The United States has its interests and its calculations. Our people has its interests ".
As everywhere else, the Yankee imperialism obtains for legitimate answer a toughening from Sudan. Faced with the American neocolonial rapacity, Khartoum is also mobilized to resist a foreign intervention.
Sudan issued the "political and strategic " general mobilization in all the bodies of the state, by affirming that it intended to resist any attempt at intervention of international forces in Darfur (western Sudan), announced on this 27 July a Sudanese minister.
"the government decided to issue the political and strategic general mobilization of all the institutions ", stated the Minister for Agriculture and head of the delegation to the negotiations with the rebels of Darfur, Majzub Al-Khalifa Ahmed, at the end of an extraordinary meeting of the Sudanese government "the government in addition decided to resist with force all the Resolutions calling the sending of international troops to Darfur ". "From now on, the government will harden its position against any foreign intervention in Darfur ", continued the Sudanese minister. He informed that the "government will treat in a suitable way any (foreign) soldier who will put the foot in Sudan ", adding that the mobilization will start with meetings with the political parties, "as well the allies as the opponents, in order to unify the interior front ".
The general mobilization will include demonstrations of protest against a possible foreign intervention, also said Mr. Ahmed.
The American Congress cynically tries to exploit the crisis for domestic political and electoral objectives, while calling with a direct military intervention. The American government, intends to prepare a new oil war . One can thus fear that Washington does not hesitate to strike militarily an Arab State again.
(Sources: LE FIGARO, DE STANDAARD, JANA, AFP, REUTERS)
add a comment on this article