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

OIF : Louise Mushikiwabo, une candidature embarrassante pour un troisième mandat de trop

C'était en novembre 2025, à Kigali. En marge de la 46e Conférence ministérielle de la Francophonie, Louise Mushikiwabo prenait la parole avec l'assurance de celle qui n'a rien à craindre : de nombreux pays, affirmait-elle, lui avaient demandé de se représenter. Spontanément. Naturellement. Unanimement presque. Sauf que les faits racontent une tout autre histoire. L'annonce qui ne devait pas avoir lieu si tôt Novembre 2025. Le Centre de Conventions de Kigali accueille plus de 400 délégués des 90 États membres de l'Organisation internationale de la Francophonie. Le thème officiel porte sur les femmes et l'égalité des genres, trente ans après Pékin. Mais en marge des séances plénières, c'est une autre affaire qui agite les couloirs : Louise Mushikiwabo vient d'annoncer qu'elle souhaite briguer un troisième mandat. L'annonce est prématurée. Délibérément. Les candidatures ne ferment qu'en avril 2026. Aucun autre pays n'a encore ...

Pourquoi les sanctions américaines ne fonctionnent pas contre le Rwanda

Pourquoi Paul Kagame a ignoré les sanctions américaines et la Résolution 2773 du Conseil de sécurité de l'ONU Entre février 2025 et mars 2026, le Trésor américain a imposé deux séries de sanctions ciblant directement la machine de guerre du Rwanda dans l'est du Congo : d'abord James Kabarebe, ministre d'État rwandais et principal intermédiaire du régime auprès du M23, puis les Forces de défense rwandaises en tant qu'entité, ainsi que quatre de leurs hauts responsables. Chacun des individus sanctionnés est demeuré en poste. Les FDR ne se sont pas retirées. Cette analyse examine pourquoi les mesures de Washington n'ont pas modifié la conduite du Rwanda — et pourquoi, selon les propres mots de Kagame, elles sont rejetées comme l'œuvre des « simplement stupides ».     Introduction : des sanctions sans conséquence La campagne de sanctions de Washington contre les opérations militaires du Rwanda dans l'est du Congo s'...

Paul Kagame: “We refuse to remove defensive measures"

Paul Kagame Refuses to Implement the Washington Accords and UN Security Council Resolution 2773: Analysis and Implications In an exclusive interview published on 3 April 2026, President Paul Kagame of Rwanda openly confirmed that Rwandan forces are deployed in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, rejected calls for their withdrawal, dismissed US sanctions as illegitimate, and signalled clear satisfaction with the current military status quo. This briefing examines what Kagame said, what his remarks mean for the Washington Accords, and what concrete steps the United States must now take if it wishes to restore credibility to its diplomacy in the Great Lakes region. Introduction: A Confession Wrapped in Grievance The interview, conducted by François Soudan and published in Jeune Afrique on 3 April 2026, is one of the most candid public statements Paul Kagame has made on Rwanda's military role in the DRC. Its significance does not lie in revealing something previously unknown. Th...

BBC News

Africanews

UNDP - Africa Job Vacancies

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

Migration Policy Institute