New Venezuelan Education exposes capitalist myth and propaganda

Children in Venezuela are to be taught that Christopher Columbus was not a hero but the importer of colonialism and disease, as part of radical education reforms proposed by the government of Hugo Chavez.

Under the proposals students will start learning Marxist ideology at 11 years of age, plus history showing the evils of colonialism and capitalism. The aim of the Bolivarian Educative System will be"the construction of a new socialist Venezuelan conscience and the formation of new generations as standard bearers for it," said President Chavez.

He said it must "transform capitalist values into human ones and transcend Euro-centric colonialism. " Outlines of the new curriculum, due to come into forcein 2010, show that as well as the unflattering depiction of Columbus, emphasis will be placed on teaching indigenous Indian history and culture, as well as that of the African slaves whose descendants now make up a significant percentage of the population. Much of the teaching profession appears less than enthusiastic about the proposed changes.
"The Bolivarian system wants to ensure that all education in Venezuela is based on the political ideology of President Chavez," said Olga Ramos, the president of the Civil Association Assembly of Education.
The reforms will be ushered in by the education minister, Adan Chavez, the President's elder brother and a long time Marxist. The changes to the education system are part of a radical overhaul of the Venezuelan political system as Mr. Chavez proposes a new constitution to usher in his"Socialism of the 21st Century" doctrine.

Kwame Nkrumah Chair in African Studies launched

The Kwame Nkrumah Chair of Learning was on Friday launched at the Institute of African Studies (IAS), University of Ghana, Legon inrecognition of the Ghana First President's foresight, personal interest and commitment to academic excellence in Ghana. The Chair, which was the outcome of an appeal made by the Institute to the Government, was funded by Anglo Gold Ashanti to the tune of 400,000 dollars with the Kwame Nkrumah Foundation donating 25million cedis.

A Chair is the highest position given to scholarsbased on their spectacular performances in aparticular field as a motivation for both theoccupants and others in the same discipline. Professor Takyiwaa Manuh, Director of IAS, said the occasion marked a historic turn in the future of the Institute, the University and the nation,She said, "as we celebrate Dr Nkrumah as a foremost intellectual of Africa, and through this Chair, thosemen and women, who work to bring dignity to Africa,and a better life and future for the teeming populations of our Continent and its Diasporas". She said the Institute appealed to the Government torecognise Dr Kwame Nkrumah in this jubilee year, notonly as a statesman and prime architect of Ghana's independence, but most especially for his intellectual contributions and commitment to African liberation and development by donating funds to establish the Chair.

She said the establishment of the Chair reciprocated the historic occasion, almost 44 years ago, when President Kwame Nkrumah formally opened the IAS in1963.

"The Chair recognises Dr Nkrumah's foresight, personal interest and commitment to academic excellence in Ghana and Africa through the establishment of the IAS; the Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences; the National Research Council and its associate institutes and the Encyclopaedia Africana Project," she said. Prof. Manuh said for Dr Nkrumah, all these formed partof the crucial task of African self-assertion, knowledge and confidence to be harnessed in theinterests of African people. She said the Institute had faced many challenges such as funding cuts, aquestioning of the very existence of university asnecessary in the African environment, inadequate research funding of basic research, intense scrutiny and debates over the relevance of African Studies, particularly in an age of ICTs and globalisation."But secure in mind our understanding and mission, wehave faced these challenges undaunted. While there isa lot that we have still not managed to achieve, the Institute proudly stands today as one of the flagships of the University of Ghana, and we pledge to do evenmore," she said. Mr Bobby Godsell, Outgoing Chief Executive Officer of Anglo Gold Ashanti, speaking on - "Business and Sustainable Development in Africa: The Experience of Anglo Gold Ashanti" - said the vision of African economic integration provided a vital bridge from politics to business. He said it was time for African leaders to cometogether and plan how to build the physical infrastructure of the Continent instead of waiting for international agencies or well-intentioned non-African politician to do that for them.

He said if governments could take the initiative inconstructing an inventory of infrastructure development, there would be private sector companies willing and able to undertake the projects. He expressed the hope that those who would occupy the Chair would strive for the high ideals of African intellectual independence and excellence consistent with its name and those students who would benefit from its teachings create a cadre of national and continental leaders that would allow the Continent to take the full and equal role in the global village of the new millennium. Mr Joseph Henry Mensah, Chairman, National Development Planning Commission, commended Anglo Gold for committing its resources to a Chair of learning in memory of an illustrious son of Ghana and Africa.

Professor Clifford Nii Boi Tagoe, Vice Chancellor, University of Ghana, said the University had drawngreat inspiration from the Chair and gave theassurance that the University would look for a worthyperson to occupy the Chair to propagate the ideas of Dr Nkrumah.

Mark It On Your Calender

Africanist Leaders and representatives of African revolutionary movements around the world will be meeting in Labe on the far north of Guinea-Conakry to discuss the effects of multinational corporate exploitation, cross boarder extortions and the ongoing economic and political crisis situations in West Africa. The Conference also aims at adopting a blue print for the speedy liberation and unification of Africa and African people worldwide.

Details about participation can be obtained through the following contacts:

Email: africanistsinfo@yahoo.com, africanistsguinee@yahoo.fr

Phone: 232-76-757924 / 232-77-898550 (Sierra Leone)

224-60-295210 (Guinea-Conakry)

Apologise And Pay Up - Bunyoro Tells Britain

From: The Monitor (Kampala, Uganda)

This is the second part of a series in which AngeloIzama writes about the Bunyoro Kingdom's demands fromthe United Kingdom over "war crimes" it inflicted against the Banyoro

Queen Elizabeth II , the head of the Commonwealth, aclub of former colonies and properties of imperial andcolonial Britain, is facing a fresh lawsuit thismonth, a $4trillion lawsuit reportedly filed on behalfof Indians who were brought into Malaysia as labourersby colonial Britain. Lawyers who filed the suit said their clients sufferedindignity and loss as virtual slaves and continued tosuffer discrimination, abandoned by the British afterMalaysia got its independence. Britain's newly appointed Foreign Secretary David Miliband is named as a defendant in the case. It isexpected that Britain which will attend theCommonwealth, a summit of heads of state of its formercolonies, in Kampala this year, will face anotherlawsuit- by the Bunyoro Kingdom. Bunyoro says it has sufficient evidence to convincecourt that Britain is guilty of gross crimes in thecase it plans to file later this month. Ugandan andBritish lawyers will argue the case. There is a smallbut growing club of organizations, religious andpolitical leaders that are calling on reluctantcountries like Britain to right the wrongs theycommitted as slave traders and later as colonialpowers. Britain however is one of the most unwilling toacknowledge its actions led to the modern day problemsof underdevelopment in far flung places such asMalaysia and Bunyoro. During the United NationsAnti-Racism conference in Durban, South Africa in2001, Britain's delegation worked hard to preventEuropean Union countries from "apologising" for slavetrade, afraid that it would mean acknowledging itsactions, and opening the door for reparation lawsuitslike the one Bunyoro is planning to file later thismonth. The historical suit Bunyoro's case is based on the recorded testimony ofBritish soldiers, actions that confirm to some extentthe wanton actions that led, in this case, to thedepopulation and subsequent marginalisation ofBunyoro. In 1893, Col. Henry Colville invaded Bunyoro,reputed to be in "a stubborn outpost of the proud KingKabalega who had made an unfavourable impression onofficers like Sir Frederick Lugard and Sir SamuelBaker." The invasion, which Kabalega resisted for five years,laid to waste the once healthy Bunyoro Kingdom becauseof a policy of destruction of crops, grazing areas andthe killing, kidnap and enslavement of Banyoro by theBritish imperial troops helped by their allies, theKingdom of Buganda. "I have this month and will in the future burn theirhouses, destroy their crops and cut down their bananaplantations" wrote one Capt. Thruston on his workduring the campaign, one of several accounts in hiswar diary. The campaign also "popularised" the looting ofBunyoro's known wealth, not just cattle and goats, butdestruction of salt mines and the shut down of trade.Cattle were either killed or raided. "Next inimportance to the Queen Mother being in our hands, isthe loss sustained by Kabalega of nearly the whole ofhis cattle - the greater part were captured by theflying column under the command of Lt. H. Maddocks, ofthe Royal Fusiliers, and Lt. G.F.S Vandeleur, ScotsGuards" one dispatch in 1895, just two years after thecampaign begun, said. The Queen Mother and several members of Kabalega'sroyal family were captured as a way to lure him andbreak his spirit. One of the officers, Maj. TrevarTernan, wrote that as "much harm as possible" shouldbe inflicted on Bunyoro arguing that "the Wanyororichly deserve all they get". The British condoned a policy of killingnon-combatants as recorded by soldiers andmissionaries in the war areas. It is Ternan who alsowrote that Banyoro who were found carrying guns wereimmediately executed on sight. Ternan also killed tosend a message, apparently recording the execution ofsix people after the death of a British collaborator. A year into the campaign, Capt. Thruston wrote that inbattle "no quarter was given, though it was frequentlyasked for" meaning even prisoners were executed evenwhere they asked for pardon. The British records alsoindicate routine torture including flogging wasinflicted on prisoners of war. Also popular wasbastinadoing, Bunyoro argues. Bastinado is a torture method where the feet arebeaten until sores develop and the victim is unable towalk. While it was a war and casualties were on bothsides, Bunyoro argues that the British officers actedoutside of the known humanitarian principles ofconducting a war even one involving natives. At theend of the campaign, one observer noted when passingBunyoro that it was "a barren waste". "The little gardens and plantations were rank withweeds and completely deserted, and the few wanderingnatives we met looked half starved," the observerwrote. However, the defeat of Kabalega and the war ofconquest were only the beginning of Bunyoro'sproblems. With war came disease and famine, and what somescholars argue was the continual hatred for theBanyoro, reflected in the colonial government'spolicies to which we will return next week. Bunyoro,the area where most of Uganda's oil has beendiscovered (Ironically by British-owned companies) isasking for more than #3trillion.

Forward Ever (by any means necessary)!
Karen C. Aboiralor

Sierra Leone: Elections deepen crisis among the middle class


By Chernoh Alpha M. Bah

Sierra Leone’s president, Ahmed Tejan Kabbah has threatened to declare a state of emergency ahead of an election run-off to be held this week if violence between supporters of contending parties persists. Already there have been continuous reports of violent clashes during the last few days in several towns and villages in the south and east of the country among supporters of rival political parties forcing the police to declare a dawn to dusk curfew in most areas across the country.

The run-off presidential elections is going to be held between the opposition All Peoples Congress (APC) leader Ernest Koroma and incumbent ruling party candidate Solomon Ekuma Berewa. Berewa is also Kabbah’s vice president.

The APC won 44% of the votes during the first round, the SLPP 38% and PMDC 14%. To win a candidate is required to pool 55% of all votes before he can form a new government.

Already the opposition APC has won a majority of the parliamentary seats during the first round of voting with the incumbent trailing behind a wider margin. So much is at stake in these elections. The incumbent Sierra Leone Peoples Party (SLPP), which has been in power since 1996 with Kabbah as its leader, cannot afford to loose the elections. As a matter of fact, Kabbah and his cronies in the SLPP are neither determined to relinquish political power to the APC nor are they prepared for an opposition victory in the presidential race.

The APC leadership, having lost political power in 1992 due to a military coup, sees the current elections as the best opportunity to assume leadership of the country and is exploiting the desperate genuine aspiration of the masses for political and economic transformation to accomplish its selfish power objective.

In reality, the current success of the APC in the ongoing electoral process is neither based on the conviction that it offers hope for the aspirations of the poor and exploited masses of African people in Sierra Leone nor is it because it provides a political programme that differs with that of the incumbent party it seeks to replace. But partly because it appears to be, within the context of the current state of affairs, the only available alternative of two proportionate evils and more so in the seemingly absence of a genuine political alternative people are naturally compelled under such circumstances to chose a perceived lesser evil. But historically the APC has never been such an alternative and will never be - just like any of the current existing political parties.

We in the Africanist Movement have maintained and we still maintain that there is no fundamental difference between the SLPP and APC or any of the existing political parties participating in the current political process. Presently, there are several political parties participating in the ongoing electoral process - all of which originates from and represents various sectors of a corrupt middle class that sees political power as the license for personal aggrandizement and wealth accumulation. Since the so-called independence, the dominant of these middle class factions have always being the SLPP and APC save for the inception of the Peoples Movement for Democratic Change (PMDC) in 2005.

But the circumstances that gave rise to the formation and existence of these political groupings and their objectives have always remained the same. The PMDC, formed and led by Charles Margai, had increased the crisis within the ruling elite. Margai, a former SLPP Internal Affairs Minister in the current regime, broke ranks with the SLPP after he was denied the party leadership in the 2005 delegates conference in which Berewa was elected presidential candidate of the party for the 2007 elections. Berewa was never a suitable and popular candidate within the rank and file of the SLPP but his nomination is said to have been influenced by Kabbah who desires to have his vice president succeeds him. Berewa appears to be a Kabbah loyalist and one that is likely to defend and maintain his current policies. It is this desire to have a loyalist succeeds him that led Kabbah to impose Berewa as his successor first within the SLPP and later on the country. It is this situation that resulted into the current split within the SLPP and ultimately led to the formation of the PMDC. Margai, a son of Sierra Leone’s former prime minister, claimed that his resignation from the Kabbah government and the SLPP is based on widespread corruption and lack of transparency within the party and government.

The unfortunate aspect of Sierra Leone’s political system, just as it is in most African countries, is that formation of political parties after or during the so-called independence period took an ethnic-regional divide. This in itself is a colonial construct arising out of the British constitutional arrangement of 1947 originally designed to create a divide between the “Creole” of the colony and the so-called “natives” of the protectorate but later resulted into the current north-west alliance versus south-east. It is this colonial strategy, designed by the British to further weaken the anti-colonial movement and militant agitations that had developed among certain sections of the “Creole” community of the colony, that gave rise to the formation of the SLPP in 1952 under the leadership of Milton Margai. Historically, the SLPP is an offspring of the general imperialist strategy after 1945 that ensured the transfer of political power to neocolonialist conservatives following the destruction of the anti-colonial movement led by Wallace Johnson.

It was the inter-party struggles and leadership acrimony that developed within the SLPP prior to the 1957 elections and during the 1960 constitutional conference in London that resulted first into the formation of the Peoples National Party (PNP) led by Albert Margai (father of PMDC leader Charles Margai) and then the Election Before Independence Movement (EBIM) which later became the APC under the leadership of Siaka Stevens. Present political parties in Sierra Leone have arisen out of these similar splits and power struggles among different sectors of the petty bourgeoisie for control of the state.

The division within the ruling class elite has had serious negative impacts on the broader mass of the country. In part it has fragmented national unity and reinforced false ethnic patriotism and regional consciousness among the masses. Traditionally, the SLPP had long relied on the south and east – mostly inhabited by mendes- for support. The mendes constitute the largest ethnic group in the country. The APC on the other hand relies on the north and west predominantly inhabited by Temnes and Limba for its support. Where as other political parties had emerged from among the northern ethnic groups, the south and east had always remained SLPP strongholds. This is why the formation of the PMDC has had significant effects on the chances of the SLPP in the current elections. Split within the SLPP has meant a split of the votes from the traditional strongholds of the party. Of the 122 contested seats in parliament the APC had won 59, the SLPP 43 and PMDC 10 during the first round of voting. And with a run-off scheduled between the SLPP and APC, PMDC leader Charles Margai has thrown his support to the APC ultimately reducing Berewa’s chances of victory in the run-off.

But the central questions are: why should Kabbah and his SLPP cronies not afford to loose the presidential elections? And more importantly, what will an APC victory mean to the aspirations of the masses?

The truth of the matter is that the current SLPP leadership is jittery in part because its policies have not translated into any form of development in the country. They completely ignored the welfare and interest of the masses that voted them into power. Although Kabbah came to power in 1996 following the national campaign for democracy, his eleven years in office has meant increased imperialist and multinational build-ups in the country. In his quest to maintain power, Kabbah gave out strategic mining concessions to several multinational British and American mining corporations in exchange for military services and protection. A British mercenary firm, Sandline International was contracted under an agreement signed between Kabbah and the British government to provide military equipments and training for the Civil Defense Forces, a militia group established by the SLPP, to fight for the restoration of Kabbah’s government after he was overthrown in a military coup in 1997. This agreement allowed the use of an international military intervention force that claimed the lives of thousands of innocent people to restore the SLPP government then exiled in Guinea Conakry.

Today, Branch Energy - a British corporation tied to Sandline International - mines the most lucrative diamond concession in West Africa as part of that arrangement. Other corporations like Mile Stone, Africa Gold and Diamonds Ltd, Petrograd Mines, Koidu Holdings, Sandoh Minerals, Sierra Leone Diamond Company (SLDC) and Bridge Resources are among some ninety multinational corporations currently exploiting resources from Kono in eastern Sierra Leone. It is estimated that about 10 million carats of diamonds is being taken out of Kono every month through the activities of these corporations. Sadly, while the corporations make huge resources, people in Sierra Leone live on less than a dollar a day with no electricity, no good roads, no proper health care system, no pipe borne water and other social services and the economic infrastructure necessary for growth and development.

The period of Kabbah’s term as president has also necessitated the introduction of a sophisticated counterinsurgency programme in the country that include a policy of massive police recruitment, deployment of imperialist troops and intelligence agencies and programme of structural adjustment influenced by imperialist nations. For instance, the British maintain a military base and huge military presence in the country and the FBI now has an outpost in Freetown. The British through the International Military Advisory Training Team (IMATT) are now in charge of training and restructuring the military and defense policy of the country. There is an Office of National Security – similar to the British MI6 – and it is predominantly made up of British military and police officers mostly commanders of the British troops in Sierra Leone – that is in charge of national intelligence and security. The British Department for International Development (DFID) – the equivalent of USAID – regulates the economic programme of the country. The justice sector reform programme has necessitated the appointment of British judges into the justice department.

Low life expectancy, high infant and maternal mortality rates, a rapidly declining economy and a vastly hungry population are the products of Kabbah’s policies and eleven years of office. These are polices he intends to continue and sustain through the imposition of Berewa as president of the country.

The imperialist strategy did not only offer protection for the neocolonial Kabbah regime, but it had helped to provide cover for the regime by dissuading the attention of the masses to the basis of the contradictions. Corruption and flagrant misuse of public resources have always been used by imperialist agencies as a blind to explain the causes of poverty and underdevelopment in most African countries where as neocolonial state exploitation and oppression are the actual causes of misery of the masses. In Sierra Leone a British funded anti-corruption strategy necessitated the establishment of an anti-corruption commission but it has become an addition to the problem rather than a solution. The SLPP government of Kabbah is one of the most corrupt neocolonial regimes on the continent and it has used these imperialist funded strategies and programmes to suppress would be contending opposition elements even within the middle class.

For instance, the United Nations backed Special Court for Sierra Leone – established under an arrangement between the SLPP government and United Nations for the trail of individuals believed to bear the greatest responsibility for crimes committed during the ten years war – is being used by the SLPP and the imperialists to silence perceived threats to their interests in the region. Among those indicted by the Special Court include former leaders of the CDF, the militia organization trained and armed by the British through the Sandline arrangement to restore the government of Kabbah after the military coup of 1997. The CDF leader, Sam Hinga Norman was Kabbah’s Defense Minister during the period of the conflict and later Internal Affairs Minister at the time of his arrest by the Special Court. CDF members have argued that Kabbah should equally be indicted because he was the head of the CDF War Council and Defense Minister simultaneously under whose directives Hinga Norman headed the operations of the CDF. PMDC leader Charles Margai, a professional lawyer, has functioned as one of the defense lawyers for the CDF leaders indicted by the Special Court.

However, Norman died early this year, under controversial circumstances, as a detainee of the Special Court. But before his death, Norman and other CDF detainees at the Special Court purportedly wrote a statement requesting their members and supporters to vote the PMDC. Margai had used this disgruntlement to garner support from former CDF members and supporters of the late Hinga Norman in the run-up to the elections. It is this CDF membership within the PMDC, mostly ex-militia fighters, that have engaged the SLPP into open battles in the south and east of the country resulting into burning of houses. The APC itself appears to have utilized the same tactic by incorporating renegades of the RUF and disbanded soldiers of the old army into its rank and file.

Consequently, with an opposition majority in the parliament and an APC-PMDC alliance ahead of the presidential run-off, Kabbah and his SLPP stalwarts have become extremely worried. Apart from fear of loosing vested interests in the multinational corporate exploitation of the resources, Kabbah risks being taken to the Special Court and most SLPP ministers as well would have to face tribunals and commissions of enquiry that will be established through the influence of the APC-PMDC merger. This may also have implications for the large multinational interests in the country and represents a threat to the corrupt patronage networks that has developed between the current ruling class elite and mercantile class predominantly Lebanese, Asiatic, individual Fulani and other indigenous business magnates who have become prosperous during the last few years due to rogue relations with this political mafia.

Regardless of the outcome of the current elections, the situation of the masses will still remain worst. Endemic, institutionalized corruption over the years have resulted into the development of a rogue middle class that has grown extremely wealthy in the midst of massive poverty and wretchedness among the majority of poor people in the country. The statistics on growth and development have remained abysmal for the last forty-six years of neocolonial state terror much of it perpetrated during the more than two decades of APC rule. So regardless of whoever wins the current political contests, there will be no significant changes in policies that will reverse the current trend of affairs. Perhaps any significant change will be an increase in the poverty and backwardness caused by increased corruption and organized state exploitation.

Perhaps the encouraging aspect of this situation is the growth of political consciousness among the masses. This seemingly unending power struggles among the petty bourgeoisie – the use of political power to selfishly accumulate wealth, political corruption, state oppression and neocolonial exploitation – have not only resulted into severe crisis within the middle class, but it has equally increased the aspirations of the masses for revolutionary change. It has stimulated political agitation among the people and fueled their desire for change in their material conditions. People are rapidly becoming conscious that decades of organized state oppression and exploitation have denied them access to state resources and social services necessary to change their conditions of existence. They are coming to terms with the necessity of building a working class revolutionary movement that will fight to overturn the existing status quo.

This growing political consciousness is undoubtedly the result of ongoing political education and campaigns of the Africanist Movement. We believe that freedom from this situation of exploitation and oppression will only come through organized efforts of the workers and peasants. The workers and peasants need a programme that addresses their needs and aspirations and one that helps them realize their selfish interests as a class. And this should be the responsibility of African revolutionaries and progressives around the world.
Smash Neocolonialism! Smash Imperialism! Build the African Socialist International!

West Africa:

AFRICANIST LEADERS SET TO TACKLE

MULTINATIONAL CORPORATE EXPLOITATION

PRESS RELEASE ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE -SEPTEMBER 5, 2007.

The Africanist Movement is pleased to announce that the 2007 International Conference on Leadership will be held in Labe, Guinea from December 28-30, 2007.
The conference will discuss the effects of multinational corporate exploitation on the African continent, the political and economic crisis situations in West Africa, cross-boarder extortions and the way forward to a free, united socialist Africa.
The Africanist International leadership conference is a grassroots initiative designed to involve African workers and poor peasants in the unification and liberation process of the continent from neocolonialism and imperialism.
It is also an annual event aimed at bringing together Africanist leaders and representatives of other African revolutionaries and progressives to discuss key issues and problems associated with Africa’s liberation and unification process.
The decision to hold this year’s international leadership conference in Guinea came out of recommendations from the emergency leadership meeting of the Africanist Movement held from August 26-27, 2007.
A follow-up meeting to further discuss the details of this year’s international leadership conference and other issues relating to the work of the movement has been scheduled for September 21-22, 2007 in Freetown, Sierra Leone.
In 2005 and 2006, Africans from Sierra Leone, Liberia, Nigeria, Ghana, Guinea, Gambia, Senegal, Burkina Fasso, Guinea Bissau, the United States, England, Belgium and Holland have attended the international leadership conferences held in Makeni, Sierra Leone and Dalaba, Guinea respectively.
This year, the international leadership conference will coincide with the 5th Anniversary of Africanist Movement.


For more information Contact:

africanistsinfo@yahoo.com, africanistsguinee@yahoo.fr

africanistmovement2003@yahoo.com

Tel: 232 76 757924/ 232 77 898550 (Sierra Leone)

224 60 295210/ 224 64 537987 (Guinea)

*Courtesy of Kabietulai Byllor Jalloh, Communications Secretary to the Director

Guinea: The Truth About the Kouyate Government

How American Corporate Interests Created a New Neocolonial Regime

By Chernoh Alpha M. Bah*

Neocolonial Prime Minister of Guinea, Lansana Kouyate has announced his plans to organize what he described as transparent elections in December 2007. This public announcement follows Kouyate’s recent visit to Washington where he met with George Bush’s Secretary of State, Condoleza Rice as well as senior officials of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund to discuss an elections agenda for Guinea and military support from the United States to his government.
In a recent interview with All Africa Global Media, Kouyate reported that his meeting with Rice has been productive because the United States has expressed commitments of supporting his government.
“We have so many challenges. The issue of security is paramount…the administration in the countryside is non-existent because the infrastructure – police stations, prison, and prefecture – was destroyed during the turmoil. But I have received total commitment from Rice that the US is going to back the process and we are working out how to reinforce the Guinean army, how to reinforce our police, our security system, and how to help us hold transparent elections in December 2007,” Kouyate told the All Africa Media Group in Washington few days ago.
We in the Africanist Movement had long referred to Kouyate as a puppet of the United States who is being imposed on the masses of African people to facilitate the theft of our aluminum resources in Guinea by the United States and its corporate allies.
Our position on Kouyate did not come from recent assessment of his current neocolonial role in Guinea but from historical evidences. Before he assumed the executive secretary position of the Economic Community of West African States (Ecowas), Kouyate among other things had worked with the United States Agency for International Development, United Nations and later served as a special envoy of France in Ivory Coast.

But a clear understanding of Kouyate’s current role and function in Guinea can best be obtained from a study of the controversial circumstances that led to his appointment into what is being described by the petty bourgeoisie as a “consensus prime minister.”
A clear examination of this trend will reveal that the circumstances that resulted in Kouyate becoming Guinea’s current prime minister are not the product of a popular arrangement from the masses neither is it the true outcome of the mass uprisings in January and February against the Conte regime. But rather it is the consequence of the illogical, insincere and dishonest decision of Guinea’s trade union leadership and certain sections of the civil society movement who themselves were working as agents of US imperialism and its corporate allies to carryout a sponsored programme for regime change in the interests of the United States and the two leading north American aluminum conglomerates – Alcoa and Alcan.
It should be remembered that the years following the death of Ahmed Sekou Toure and the arrival of General Lansana Conte into power marked a period of intense western capitalist corporate concentration in Guinea - the build-ups of capital monopolies over the aluminum and iron ore mines in Guinea by leading north American corporations. Apart from the Russian Aluminum Company (Rusal), Alcan and Alcoa had remained the dominant corporations controlling and exploiting aluminum and iron ore from Guinea.
By 2006 for instance, Alcoa alone - the world’s leading producer and manger of primary aluminum – is believed to have extracted 86, 300 tons of bauxite daily from its mining concessions in Guinea from which 9, 575 tons of aluminum is smelted and 8, 810 tons of aluminum products that include consumer brands like Reynolds Wrap, Alcoa wheels and Baco household wraps were produced.
For a very long time, however, this north American corporate monopoly over the bauxite and iron ore reserves in Guinea went unchallenged. The Lansana Conte regime that came to power in a 1984 coup sponsored by France and the United States against the then socialist government of Ahmed Sekou Toure had depended on capital provided by these imperialist corporations to carryout the functioning of his administration. In fact, both France and the United States had supported the Conte regime on the basis that he maintains a free enterprise economy that guarantees the development of mining capital by western mining corporations.
Due to persuasion from the United States and France, Conte consequently drafted a new mining policy for Guinea in 1986; just two years after he assumed power. The policy known as the 1986 Mining Code, based largely on French law, gave away the extractive sector of the economy to western capitalist corporations. It provided a range of guarantees and tax incentives for the development of mining capital by western capitalist corporations allowing them ownership of at least 85% of any mining venture in Guinea.
It was part of this code also that a new department, the Centre for Mining Promotion and Development (CPDM), was established through financial support from the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. This was to enable the Conte regime to undertake joint new surveys with several capitalist mining corporations across the country, which eventually resulted in the identification of strategic mineral deposits in several parts of the country including the richest bauxite reserves at Sangaredi and Kerouani in the far east of Guinea and the creation of a national database of geological information.
Through this programme, at least a hundred multinational corporations, some of which were subsidiaries of both Alcoa and Alcan, gained unfettered access and control over Guinea’s mineral wealth between 1986-2005. Guinea’s Ministry of Mines and Geological Surveys in its 2005 Mining Sector Report revealed that about 100 multinational corporations are actively mining across the country. These did not include corporations owned by dubious individual magnates involved in nefarious activities around the world or corporations operating under the pseudo-ownership of some senior corrupt officials of the Conte regime.
The United States and France had helped the Conte regime develop a military and security service that enabled him to enforce a crude regime system that facilitated the theft and transfer of these resources by the various multinational corporations operating in the country. Since he assumed power in 1984, Conte has suppressed every opposition to his policies and developed a political mafia that survived from mismanagement of resources, embezzlement of public funds, political abuse, rogue alliances and corrupt contracts from western capitalist corporations exploiting the masses.
The Conte regime did not only use the military and police against organized opposition to his government but also to enforce the dictates of US imperialism and its allies. The process of legalization of Conte’s rogue regime took ground in 1993 after Conte won a controversial election organized and rigged by France and the United States on his behalf. Since then, Conte’s Party of Unity and Progress (PUP) had rigged all subsequent elections.
But throughout the period, the United States and France committed themselves to supporting the Conte regime only because he upheld the interests of the leading north American corporations operating in Guinea. In its 2005 Annual Report on Guinea, for example, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) stated that: “the United States strategic interests in Guinea is to promote increased US private investment in Guinea’s emerging economy as there are several large US Corporations in Guinea possessing significant shares of their respective markets.”
What this implies is that the United States was equally prepared to adopt an alternative mechanism and approach to secure the increased north American corporate exploitation and monopoly over Guinea’s vast aluminum and other strategic resources. This was in fact a key factor in Washington’s support for the Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD) -- a counter rebel movement organized by the United States against the then government of Liberia headed by Charles Taylor after 1997.
The United States had feared that Taylor, because of his relations with the French shortly after his inauguration as president in 1997, might use his NPFL fighters to attack US-controlled mining interests in Guinea. And when in 2000-2001, rebels believed to be part of Taylor’s NPFL fighters subsequently attacked Guinea villages along the borders of Liberia and Sierra Leone, the United States eventually provided huge military assistance -weapons and ammunitions - to the Guinea army to counter-attack strategic locations across the Liberia border in retaliation.
The seriousness of this threat to US interests was emphasized in a December 2001 communiqué issued by the US embassy in Conakry which partly states that: “unrest in Guinea does not only represents a major security problem for West Africa but also our nation’s most security threats because the United States has invested heavily in Guinea where our strategic interests remain strong and multi-faceted.”
But the period following 2003 was to mark the beginning of a new tactic by the United States and its imperialist allies in their efforts to protect the mining concessions of its two most leading north American corporations, Alcan and Alcoa. This was when the Guinean Ministry of Mineral Resources granted the richest aluminum-mining concession in West Africa to a Japanese corporation, Global Aluminum Productions Corporation (GAPCO), a subsidiary of Mitsubishi and Merubeni conglomerates. This agreement allowed GAPCO the definitive right to undertake exploration and extraction of aluminum resources around the Sangaredi area for a period of hundred years.
This annoyed the United States and its allies whose control of Guinea’s aluminum resources since 1984 had depended on Alcoa and Alcan’s monopoly over mineral exploitation in the country. In retaliation, the United States withdrew its supposed assistance and support to the Conte regime and alternatively sought a new agenda for regime change in Guinea. Because of absolute loyalty to the regime and due to excessive military spending, senior officers within the Guinean military had grown extremely rich from misappropriation of salaries and did not think of overthrowing Conte. A coup plot in January 2005 believed to have been masterminded through the US embassy in Conakry failed to topple Conte resulting in the dismissal of several officers.
Realizing that a military coup is hardly fashionable with an army that is doggedly loyal to the presidency, the US agenda for regime change in Guinea initially targeted the disaffected opposition parties. But the various opposition leaders - Ba Mamadou, a former World Bank consultant, Sidya Toure, an ex-employee of the IMF, and Prof. Alpha Conde, a retired lecturer at Sorbonne University in France persuaded by the US to form an opposition coalition in a campaign against Conte - couldn’t overturn the Conte regime as was envisaged by the US. This is partly because the opposition leaders lacked the required mass support to carryout a popular agenda and willingness to accept the leadership of any one of them. It was following the proved inability of the opposition parties to carryout the regime change agenda that forced the US to alternatively focus attention on the labour unions and a section of the civil society movement.

Consequently, in a report issued by USAID on Guinea’s political situation in June 2005, the United States openly called on the European Union and international financial institutions to withhold aid and assistance to Guinea as a way of forcing the Conte regime to embark on “democratic reforms.”
So for three years subsequent to the GAPCO agreement, the US had expended around a million dollars in a programme designed to develop the labour union leadership in preparation of a mass campaign against Conte. It was this strategy that ultimately culminated in the trade unionists position during the mass uprisings against the Conte regime in January and February this year. This also explains the basis of the trade union leadership’s decision to suggest the appointment of Lansana Kouyate, a US neocolonialist, as Guinea’s new prime minister.

Evidences that the trade unionist position was part of this wider sinister plot by the United States and its corporate allies was clearly evident in a statement issued by the State Department following Kouyate’s appointment. It reads:

“The United States notes with satisfaction the appointment on March 28 of a new government of broad consensus in Guinea. We salute Prime Minister Lansana Kouyate's intention to focus priorities on macroeconomic stability….the new government provides Guinea an important opportunity to improve democratic governance through increased transparency and the protection of human rights. We look forward to working with the new government as they translate their strategy for a democratic, accountable and prosperous Guinea into action.”

Besides, the fact that the US was deeply involved in the Guinea crisis and the reality that the trade union leadership received directives from the American embassy in Conakry was further evident in a statement issued by the embassy on February 16 this year, which did not only condemn the Conte regime but also expressed dissatisfaction over the desperate actions of the masses who were no longer following the dictates of the labour union leaders.

It is this imperialist conspiracy executed by fickle minded petty bourgeois sellouts that necessitated the imposition of Kouyate as leader of a neocolonial government with responsibility of securing the interests of American corporations in Guinea. So it is inarguable that Kouyate is not a consensus prime minister as the imperialist media has been suggesting. And it will be irrational, naïve and preposterous to assume or suggest that the struggle of the masses in Guinea to reclaim control of our resources has been nipped in the bud following a middle class settlement that insultingly imposes an imperialist puppet on the blood of the masses.
In fact, recent and continuing trends within Guinea and the region in general should be, and we believe it is already, a serious source of concern for the ability of imperialism and its neocolonial agents to continuously hold our people hostage under this suffocating and decadent system. As a matter of reality, Kouyate himself is now riddled with tremendous contradictions as seventy-five percents of the country has absolutely refused to recognize his legitimacy. In most parts of the interior, his authority is non-existent and worst still, within Conakry he also faces the rifles of angry soldiers who are still loyal to Conte. There is serious bad blood between Kouyate and Conte’s old political clique who are isolated and represent another danger from within.
Kouyate’s only hopes – hopes which he shares with his imperialist masters – is the employment of military power, and in this case, the deployment of an international military force that will create space for the enforcement of a deceitful electoral process to “legitimize” this ongoing process. This is the rationale of Kouyate’s recent visit to the United States and his meeting with the Bush regime and officials of the World Bank and IMF.

This was clearly stated in his interview with All Africa Global Media during his trip to Washington. He said:
“The immediate need of my government is to rehabilitate all the destroyed buildings inside the country, because without that we cannot send the local authorities to establish and monitor election procedures. But, immediately, we need money. The European Union has committed roughly seven million euros, but this is directly linked to the election process itself. It has nothing to do with the rehabilitation or restoration of the buildings we are talking about, which will require some money. So I discussed that today with the newly appointed ambassador of the United States to Conakry. The policy of "wait and see" in emergency cases is not a good option. The situation can deteriorate. It is wise to help before the election. Secretary Rice said the United States was going to help us as soon as possible.”

This did not only indicate the level of US involvement in the situation in Guinea but it equally highlights how serious it is to imperialist interests. Few days after Kouyate’s visit, a US Navy frigate was dispatched to the coast of Conakry. In a press conference held on June 22 by the US embassy in Conakry, Commanding Officer of the vessel, Michael Elliott told journalists in Conakry, “the deployment is part of an ongoing effort to enhance relations throughout West Africa and the US commitment to help bring stability and economic opportunity to the region.” The vessel, an Oliver Hazard Perry Guided Missile Fast Frigate, is home ported in Mayport, Fla., and has been operating in the region for several weeks.
This represents a serious threat and challenge to the African liberation movement. We in the Africanist Movement insist that the struggle in Guinea is not yet over. And as stated by the African Socialist International, it represents a strategic component of our general struggle for African independence and control over our resources. It is a clear call to the international African community, revolutionaries and progressives around the world to unite in defense of a just struggle for self-determination.

This is a call we must answer! Build the African Socialist International! Forward to Victory!

* Chernoh Alpha M. Bah, an award wining journalist and former editor of Sierra Leone 's Concord Times newspaper, is the Leader and Director of the Africanist Movement. He was the founder and president of the Young Writers Association of Guinea and now president of the West Africa Media Forum Monetary Zone. For information, please contact him at africanists@yahoo.com.

AFRICANIST MOVEMENT TO HOLD

ANTI-IMPERIALIST CONFERENCE IN GUINEA

By Kabietulai Byllor Jalloh*

An anti-imperialist conference to discuss the effects of multinational corporate exploitation, political and economic crisis and cross-boarder extortions in West Africa will take place this December in Guinea, a press release from the Africanist Movement stated.

The conference will be organized by the Africanist Movement and aims at bringing together Africanist leaders and representatives of African revolutionary organizations to discuss key issues and problems associated with Africa’s liberation and unification process.

“The Africanist leadership conference is part of an annual grassroots leadership programme designed by the Africanist Movement to involve African workers and poor peasants in the unification and liberation process of Africa from neocolonialism and imperialism,” the statement said, adding that, “the decision to organize a leadership conference in Guinea was the result of a resolution passed at an emergency Africanist leadership meeting held last month in Conakry.”

Africanist leader, Chernoh Alpha M. Bah said: “this conference should help us adopt a final programme and strategy that will guide our efforts to achieve a free, united socialist Africa.”

Since 2005 the Africanist leadership conference have gathered Africans from Sierra Leone, Liberia, Nigeria, Ghana, Guinea, Gambia, Senegal, Burkina Fasso, Guinea Bissau, the United States, England, Belgium and Holland to discuss Africa’s development challenges.

The Africanist Movement intends to make this year’s conference a landmark as it coincides with the fifth anniversary of the movement.

“We will try to get participation from as many Africans as possible if we are able to raise the resources required for the programme,” the Africanist Director said and added that, “this conference will have far reaching effects for the expansion of our activities.”

Last year the Africanist leadership conference was held in Dalaba and this year it is scheduled for Labe in the north of Guinea and will take place from December 28-30, 2007.

*Kabietulai Byllor Jalloh, an Executive Committee of the Africanist Movement, is the Personal Communications Secretary Attached to the Director.

UNDERSTANDING THE AFRICANIST MOVEMENT

“The future of Africa depends on our ability to build a mass movement

committed to organizing the oppressed and exploited majority of our people

to struggle against our oppression and exploitation,”

–Chernoh Alpha M. Bah

The Africanist Movement was founded in Sierra Leone on March 15, 2002 as a mass movement fighting for the total liberation and unification of Africa and African people worldwide under an all-African socialist government. Comprising mainly of young people, the Africanist Movement currently operates from Sierra Leone with branches in most West African states including Guinea Conakry, Gambia, Nigeria, Liberia, Senegal, Gambia and Cameroon.

A Sierra Leonean journalist and political activist Chernoh Alpha M. Bah founded the movement in 2002 but its history dates way back to 1996 with the formation of the Awareness Movement by Chernoh Alpha M. Bah and other young activists to campaign against the atrocities of the Foday Sankoh’s Revolutionary United Front (RUF) at the time. However, though Bah and his colleagues had intended to develop the Awareness Movement into a militant youth movement, this desire was hampered by the military coup of May 1997 that overthrew the Sierra Leone Peoples Party government. And following the reign of terror that accompanied the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) most Awareness Movement members fled to Guinea to escape harassment and intimidation by AFRC forces. Even though some of the leaders remained behind, the activities of the Awareness Movement became weakened and loosely coordinated through press activities and when RUF rebels attacked Freetown in 1999 Bah and the remaining leadership of the Awareness Movement fled to Guinea.

In exile he formed the Young Writers Association, which worked to unite writers and journalists displaced from Sierra Leone and Liberia. Journalists from the association reported abuses against the thousands of African people from war zones of those countries that were seeking refuge in camps in Guinea.

The Young Writers Association quickly developed into a mass movement, bringing together Africans from Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia to discuss problems facing refugees and their persistent harassment and intimidation by the Guinea police. The Association became a vehicle not only for the discussion of problems facing the war-torn African population in Guinea but also of the need for the African masses to unite and organize for genuine liberation in Africa.
As president of the Association, Chernoh helped established The Nations Newspaper, the first English publication in Conakry to provide news and analysis of the conditions of Africans in exile in Guinea and the conflicts in both Sierra Leone and Liberia.
In 2001 Chernoh was arrested in Guinea and detained on charges of “espionage and sedition.” After his release from prison the regime in Guinea banned the Young Writers Association and The Nations Newspaper. Chernoh returned to Sierra Leone, bringing together what remained of the Young Writers Association to form the Africanist Movement whose goal is to fight for the uncompromising liberation and unification of the oppressed African masses and to establish a all African woker's states based on socialist democracy.

Since that time the Africanist Movement has grown into a mass movement dedicated to African liberation and unification with thousands of members in more than eight countries throughout West Africa and relations with progressive organizations and revolutionary movements across Africa, Europe, the United States and other parts of the World. It is one of the most dynamic youth movement currently operating in Africa.
Ideologically the Africanist Movement believes in scientific socialism and committed to building an international African working class movement that will spearhead an international socialist revolution in Africa. Its members believe that freedom from neocolonialism and imperialism can only be possible through the development of a revolutionary mass organization guided by a working class revolutionary theory that explains the excesses of capitalism and the tactics and strategies for the overthrow of neocolonialism and imperialism.

Strategically, the Africanist Movement believes that the struggle of African people everywhere is part of the universal struggle against capitalism and for world socialism, and that the sameness of the contradictions facing African people around the world requires an all-African solution. This ideological framework and understanding of the Africanist Movement aims at a free, united socialist Africa – an Africa without boundaries and governed by the working class.