Via Gerard Direct:
When Barack Obama promised to be the President who ended the
foreign wars and brought our soldiers home, he neglected to tell us that
we would be engaged in new wars in Africa. In addition to our deep
involvement in Libya, and our interference in Yemen, Egypt, and Syria,
it seems that the new venue for our military will be in Africa, where
conflicts have been raging for years.
The government has issued a vague description of their
assignment, including exercises, training programs, and other
activities, the use of drones and other high tech equipment has also
been discussed. Training foreign military and police has not always
worked out well for us, as terrorist organizations in the West Bank,
Iraq, and Afghanistan has been well utilized by those who wear the
uniforms during the day and build bombs at night. By doing so, we give
them even better access to critical assets and increase their ability to
harm our personnel.
The three looming questions are: to which countries are they going, whom are they training (and whom will they be fighting), and how will we pay for it?
The time is long overdue when we should not only start studying recent history, but learning from it as well. In 2009, for example, we recognized an al Qaeda threat in Mali, and sent military personnel to assist the Malians build their defense capabilities and make their Army a more professional and effective fighting force. Less than three years later, the country nevertheless suffered a violent coup by Islamists who grabbed power and began a flood of human rights abuses on the population.
Amnesty International released a report on December 21 that stated, “since April 2012, Islamist groups in Mali’s north have imposed a reign of terror, introducing punishments such as amputations, flogging, and stoning to death for those who oppose their interpretation of Islam.” Muslim forces also destroyed ancient mosques in Timbuktu, reportedly banned video games, Malian and Western music, bars, and football, ransacked alcohol-serving establishments, and ordered women to cover their heads. There were also claims that women and girls were kidnapped and raped by the Islamists. stating that the conflict had created Mali’s worst human rights situation since 1960.
The point is this: what did we accomplish by sending military
support? Rather than helping, it seems that wherever we interfere, we
sow the seeds of chaos and invite Islamist terrorists to take over the
country. It is happening in Yemen, in Egypt, in Syria, and soon in
Jordan.
Alliances are fickle, and many of those we trained in the past are now violently anti-American and pose new threats to America. The consequences, unintended or otherwise, will no doubt present themselves soon enough, and we will lose valuable lives once again because of our misguided efforts to train and arm our future enemies.
— Editor
The teams will be limited to training and equipping efforts, and will not be permitted to conduct military operations without specific, additional approvals from the secretary of defense.
The sharper focus on Africa by the U.S. comes against a backdrop of widespread insurgent violence across North Africa, and as the African Union and other nations discuss military intervention in northern Mali.
The terror threat from al-Qaida linked groups in Africa has been growing steadily, particularly with the rise of the extremist Islamist sect Boko Haram in Nigeria. Officials also believe that the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, which killed the ambassador and three other Americans, may have been carried out by those who had ties to al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb.
This first-of-its-kind brigade assignment — involving teams from the 2nd Brigade, 1st Infantry Division — will target countries such as Libya, Sudan, Algeria and Niger, where al-Qaida-linked groups have been active. It also will assist nations like Kenya and Uganda that have been battling al-Shabab militants on the front lines in Somalia.
Gen. Carter Ham, the top U.S. commander in Africa, noted that the brigade has a small drone capability that could be useful in Africa. But he also acknowledged that he would need special permission to tap it for that kind of mission.
“If they want them for (military) operations, the brigade is our first sourcing solution because they’re prepared,” said Gen. David Rodriguez, the head of U.S. Army Forces Command. “But that has to go back to the secretary of defense to get an execute order.”
Already the U.S. military has plans for nearly 100 different exercises, training programs and other activities across the widely diverse continent. But the new program faces significant cultural and language challenges, as well as nagging questions about how many of the lower-level enlisted members of the brigade, based in Fort Riley, Kan., will participate, since the teams would largely be made up of more senior enlisted troops and officers. A full brigade numbers about 3,500, but the teams could range from just a few people to a company of about 200. In rare cases for certain exercises, it could be a battalion, which would number about 800.
To bridge the cultural gaps with the African militaries, the Army is reaching out across the services, the embassies and a network of professional organizations to find troops and experts that are from some of the African countries. The experts can be used during training, and the troops can both advise or travel with the teams as they begin the program.
“In a very short time frame we can only teach basic phrases,” said Col. Matthew McKenna, commander of the 162nd Infantry Brigade that will begin training the Fort Riley soldiers in March for their African deployment. “We focus on culture and the cultural impact — how it impacts the African countries’ military and their operations.”
Thomas Dempsey, a professor with the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, said the biggest challenge will be the level of cultural, language and historical diversity across the far-flung continent.
“How do you train for that in a way that would be applicable wherever they go?” said Dempsey, a retired Army colonel. He said he’s not sure using a combat brigade is the right answer, but added, “I’m not sure what the answer is. The security challenges differ so dramatically that, to be honest, I really don’t think it’s feasible to have a continental training package.”
The Pentagon’s effort in Africa, including the creation of U.S. Africa Command in 2007, has been carefully calibrated, largely due to broad misgivings across the continent that it could spawn American bases or create the perception of an undue U.S. military influence there. As a result, the command has been based in Stuttgart, Germany, rather than on the African continent.
At the same time, many African nations are eager for U.S. training or support, as they work to build their militaries, battle pirates along the coast and shut down drug trafficking, kidnapping and other insurgent activities.
McKenna acknowledged the challenge, but said the military has to tap its conventional fighting forces for this task because there aren’t enough special operations forces to meet the global training needs. He said there will be as many as a dozen different training segments between February and September, each designed to provide tailored instruction for the particular teams.
The
mission for the 2nd Brigade — known as the “Dagger Brigade” — will
begin in the spring and will pave the way for Army brigades to be
assigned next to U.S. Pacific Command and then to U.S. European Command
over the next year. The brigade is receiving its regular combat training
first, and then will move on to the more specific instruction needed
for the deployments, such as language skills, cultural information and
other data about the African nations.
Dagger Brigade commander Col. Jeff Broadwater said the language and culture training will be different than what most soldiers have had in recent years, since they have focused on Pashtun and Farsi, languages used mostly in Afghanistan and Iran. He said he expects the soldiers to learn French, Swahili, Arabic or other languages, as well as the local cultures.
“What’s really exciting is we get to focus on a different part of the world and maintain our core combat skills,” Broadwater said, adding that the soldiers know what to expect. “You see those threats (in Africa) in the news all the time.”
The brigade will be carved up into different teams designed to meet the specific needs of each African nation. As the year goes on, the teams will travel from Fort Riley to those nations — all while trying to avoid any appearance of a large U.S. military footprint.
“The challenge we have is to always understand the system in their country,” said Rodriguez, who has been nominated to be the next head of Africa Command. “We’re not there to show them our system, we’re there to make their system work. Here is what their army looks like, and here is what we need to prepare them to do.”
Rodriguez said the nearly 100 assignments so far requested by Ham will be carried out with “a very small footprint to get the high payoff.”
Read the original article here.
By Lolita C. Baldor, Associated Press – December 24, 2012
This is because Africa Command is a relatively new military command. Obama wants to strengthen it before it comes under the budget axe.
Posted by: R.J. Godlewski | December 27, 2012 at 11:39 AM
We got no business going there.
I'm so damned tired of all this Africa horseshit...who cares !
Seems to me the new theatre we should be concentrating on is Asia.
The chinese plan to take and keep most of it, yet this turd we got as leader won't even brand the chinese currency manipulators.
Not to mention they have a plan for our total demise someday. (Read Unrestricted Warfare , it's availiable online in PDF )
But this is what ya get , when ya got a shitbird like Obamugabe who takes his foreign policy advice from Hollywood.
Betcha Bonno is happy.
Posted by: PALADIN | December 27, 2012 at 05:54 PM