Skip to main content

Fw: [rwanda_revolution] AMERICANS AND BRITISH ARE PURSUING MASSIVE LAND GRAB IN SOUTH SUDAN



On Friday, 27 December 2013, 6:04, Herrn Edward Mulindwa <mulindwa@look.ca> wrote:
 
US and UK pursuing a 'massive land grab' in South Sudan
Get short URL
Published time: December 24, 2013 16:49
SPLA-N fighter stands with a mortar shell near Jebel Kwo village in the rebel-held territory of the Nuba Mountains in South Kordofan (Reuters/Goran Salva Kiir government in South Sudan is effectively "a terrorist government put in power by the West" to tap into country's vast resources, war correspondent Keith Harmon Snow, told RT.
RT: How possible is another irrevocable split - this time of South Sudan? Or has that already happened in reality?
Keith Harmon Snow: It is already happening in reality. The fighting since December 15 has led to the murder of about 5,000 people in the Juba area according to reports we are getting from South Sudan. Of course, none of this is in the international media at all; the international press is completely relying on the government of Salva Kiir for their facts and their information. And the government of Salva Kiir is effectively a terrorist government put in power by the West.
RT: What interests are the US and UK pursuing in South Sudan? Why they are involved there?
KS: Massive land grab! We are talking about agricultural resources that have not been tapped into that [huge] agribusiness want to take control of it. Sudan is home to massive properties that are producing, or have produced in the past, the main ingredient for soft drinks and ice cream, which is gum-arabic. The Darfur area in particular was [important] because the gum-arabic produced there [accounts for two-thirds] of the world's supply, and it's the best gum-arabic in the world. South Sudan has mining reserves and it also has massive oil reserves. Those are the biggest interests: land, oil, mining and agricultural production.
RT: How is the conflict affecting the oil industry and what is the international community doing about it?
KS: The oil industry in Sudan has backed the terrorism that happened there and agents of power that have put in place the government of Salva Kiir. The agents that supported the South Sudan, Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA), would be the government of Uganda and powerful factions from the United States, including cooperative executives from the oil companies.
The interests of the oil companies have been served by bringing the SPLA into power, which they did, and they succeeded in creating a separate independent state called South Sudan. In the process, the oil has continued to flow out of South Sudan. They have brought about this situation and every day there is killing inside South Sudan; it benefits the oil companies because if you remove the people you have greater control of the land.
andout photo from UNMISS shows officers from the UNMISS Japanese contingent provide water to civilians seeking refuge in UN House, the UNMISS (United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan) compound on the southwestern outskirts of Juba on December 16, 2013. (AFP/UNMISS)
RT: How strong are the government's forces now?
KS: The Sudan People's Liberation Army, which would be the government forces, has been split into several factions, and in the fight that has occurred recently has been the faction that is the government in power: Salva Kiir, versus Riek Machar. Both of these guys, Riek Machar and Salva Kiir, were from the Sudan People's Liberation Army previously.
[The] government [of] Salva Kiir has perpetrated massive atrocities against the Luo-Nuer since December 15, especially the Nuer people in the Juba area, where the reports are 5,000 killed; and that would be mostly women and children, non-combatants of any sort. I don't see any possibility of what we would call democracy in South Sudan.
RT: Tens of thousands of civilians have found shelter in UN compounds. How vulnerable are they at this point?
KS: You have to look at the UN occupation of South Sudan as a part of a complete occupation, domination and expropriation of the land of Sudan from the people of Sudan. The UN interests in Sudan serve the power structures, they don't serve the people.
The fact that they have created a refugee camp is just another business opportunity for organizations like Save the children, or the Norwegian People's Aid, which has [projected] itself as a humanitarian organization, and has actually shipped weapons into South Sudan. You have to look at this from this prospective: the UN, the African Union, the Ugandan troops, and there are 3,000 Ugandan troops currently in South Sudan backed by the Pentagon, backed by the African command of the Pentagon.
This is what's going down in South Sudan. It's not an internal tribal war, it's a western corporate occupation and what we would call pacification of South Sudan strictly for the land grab and for the resource grab that's going on. And the people that are suffering the atrocities committed by the government of Salva Kiir have started to fight back. [The] Nuer were unhappy with the Dinka government, which has now turned on the Nuer people, and that's where the war comes from.
A guy at Smith college, Dr. Eric Reeves, has been a number one propagandist about South Sudan being the victims of atrocities for all these years, when in fact the government today, the Sudan people's Liberation government, has been the power that has been committing those atrocities in South Sudan as well as in North Sudan.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
 
 
           Thé Mulindwas Communication Group
"With Yoweri Museveni and Dr. Kiiza Besigye Uganda is in anarchy"
           
Kuungana Mulindwa Mawasiliano Kikundi
"Pamoja na Yoweri Museveni na Dk. Kiiza Besigye Uganda ni katika machafuko"
 
__._,_.___

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Le Rwanda au Mozambique : qui les a placés là, pourquoi ils ne peuvent pas rester et pourquoi la SADC doit les remplacer avant que les dégâts ne deviennent permanents

  Qui a placé le Rwanda là-bas, pourquoi la France refuse de le remplacer, comment le déploiement est devenu un bouclier contre les sanctions, et pourquoi la SADC doit agir avant que les dégâts ne deviennent permanents Mars 2026   Résumé exécutif Les sanctions occidentales contre les Forces de Défense du Rwanda (RDF), imposées par les États-Unis le 2 mars 2026 en vertu du Global Magnitsky Act et relayées par une pression croissante de l'Union européenne, ont mis à nu une contradiction stratégique de premier ordre. La même force militaire sanctionnée pour son soutien opérationnel direct au groupe rebelle M23 en République démocratique du Congo est simultanément le principal garant sécuritaire d'un projet de gaz naturel liquéfié (GNL) de 20 milliards de dollars exploité par le géant français TotalEnergies à Cabo Delgado, dans le nord du Mozambique. Cette analyse répond à trois questions interconnectées dont les réponses définissent ...

UK and US in Africa Great Lakes: A Strategy Built on Sand

  A Strategy Built on Sand: How Western Military Support for Rwanda and Uganda. Fuelled Authoritarianism and Prolonged Conflict in the African Great Lakes Region.   Introduction: The Logic That Failed For more than three decades, the United States and the United Kingdom have invested heavily in building what they hoped would be stable, capable, and pro-Western security partners in the African Great Lakes Region. Rwanda and Uganda were the centrepiece of this strategy. Both governments received billions of dollars in financial assistance, advanced military training, logistical support, and sophisticated equipment. Both were celebrated in Western capitals as models of governance, post-conflict reconstruction, and economic development. That strategy has failed — comprehensively and consequentially. What the United States and United Kingdom created were not pillars of regional stability. They created highly militarised, authoritaria...

Working for Money : How France-Based Media Abandoned Credible Journalism to Serve Paul Kagame

A Critical Analysis of Jeune Afrique, Africa Intelligence, Africa Arabia and Le Point.   Introduction. Media organisations do not operate in a political vacuum. When influential publications depend on financial relationships with governments for their commercial survival, the resulting editorial distortions are not incidental — they are structural. In the African Great Lakes region, where political violence, human rights violations and systematic impunity intersect with international diplomacy and foreign investment, the question of who shapes the narrative is not academic. It is a matter of accountability. Several France-based publications — among them Jeune Afrique, Africa Intelligence, Africa Arabia and Le Point — have established themselves as the primary reference points for international audiences seeking to understand Rwanda and its role in Central and East Africa. Their analyses reach diplomats, policymakers, investors and political elites across Af...

BBC News

Africanews

UNDP - Africa Job Vacancies

How We Made It In Africa – Insight into business in Africa

Migration Policy Institute