Ethiopia has become an Anglo-American proxy in the Horn of Africa

Editorial Note

Global Research presents these articles to our readers as further verification of the link between events in the Horn of Africa and the Middle East and the deep involvement of the United States. Ethiopia has become a regional surrogate or proxy for the United States and Britain. This is evident from the coordination of the U.S. military and Ethiopian troops in Somalia.

Ethiopian and U.S. intervention in Somalia is being justified to the international public under the pretext of fighting terrorism and Al-Qaeda.

These events are no mere coincidence and are to be analyzed and observed with the utmost scrutiny by individuals and nations all over the world. 

General John Abizaid, the U.S. military commander overseeing U.S. military operations in the Middle East, Central Asia, and the Horn of Africa, had a low profile meeting with the Ethiopian Prime Minister on December 4, 2006, in Ethiopia. Approximately three weeks later the United States and Ethiopia both intervened militarily in Somalia.

The Speaker of the Transitional Somali Parliament, Sharif Hassan Shiekh Adan, has also accused Ethiopia of deliberately sabotaging “any chance of peace in Somalia.” 

Why would Ethiopia or anyone deliberately sabotage peace talks in Somalia?

Ethiopia is clearly not acting on its own. The actions of Ethiopia are not only carefully coordinated with the Pentagon and approved by the White House, but they are also part of a broader set of Anglo-American strategic initiatives in the African continent and the Middle East.  There are also strong desires by Washington D.C., London, and the Anglo-American oil giants to destabilize East Africa in justification of military intervention and expanded NATO missions in Africa from Chad and Sudan to the Horn of Africa.

 Events in Somali, as in Sudan, are linked to the international thirst and rivalry for oil and energy, but are also part of the aligning of a geo-strategic chessboard revolving around the Middle East and Central Asia. The confrontation occurring in Somalia and East Africa is in part also a script of preparations for confrontation in the Middle East between the United States, Britain, Israel, and their developing coalition— dubbed the Coalition of the “Moderate”—against Iran, Syria, and their regional allies.

Global Research, 13 January 2007

How US forged an alliance with Ethiopia over Invasion

The Guardian

January 13, 2007

Suzanne Goldenberg and Xan Rice

On December 4, General John Abizaid, the commander of US forces from the Middle East through Afghanistan, arrived in Addis Ababa to meet the Ethiopian prime minister, Meles Zenawi. Officially, the trip was a courtesy call to an ally. Three weeks later, however, Ethiopian forces crossed into Somalia in a war on its Islamist rulers, and this week the US launched air strikes against suspected al-Qaida operatives believed to be hiding among the fleeing Islamist fighters.

“The meeting was just the final handshake,” said a former intelligence officer familiar with the region.

Washington and Addis Ababa may deny it, but the air strikes this week exposed close intelligence and military cooperation between Ethiopia and America, fuelled by mutual concern about the rise of Islamists in the chaos of Somalia.

Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that US military personnel entered southern Somalia this week to verify who was killed in Monday’s air strike. It was the first known instance of US boots on the ground in Somalia since the Black Hawk Down catastrophe, when 18 US soldiers were killed by Somali militiamen, the paper claimed.

But Pentagon officials and intelligence analysts say a small number of US special forces were on the ground before Ethiopia’s intervention in an operation planned since last summer, soon after the Islamic Courts Union took control of Mogadishu. Press reports have said US special forces also accompanied the Ethiopian troops crossing into Somalia.

The main cause of delay was the weather. Mark Schroeder, Africa analyst at the intelligence consulting firm Stratfor, said the critical turning point was the end of the rain season. “While Ethiopia could move small numbers of troops and trucks as a limited intervention into Somalia, they needed to wait until the ground dried up.”

Once they did move in, the troops were accompanied by US special forces, analysts say. For America, the relationship with Ethiopia provides an extra pair of eyes in a region that it fears could become an arena for al-Qaida.

“The Ethiopians are the primary suppliers of intelligence,” said one analyst. However, he said, it was almost inconceivable that the US would not have sent its special forces into Somalia ahead of the Ethiopian intervention. “You are going to want to have your own people on the ground.”

In return, the US is believed to have provided the Ethiopians with arms, fuel and other logistical support for a much larger intervention than it has previously mounted in Somalia.

It has also made available satellite information and intelligence from friendly Somali clans, a former intelligence officer said. America’s renewed interest in the Horn of Africa dates to November 2002 when the US military established its joint taskforce in Djibouti, now the base for 1,800 troops, including special operations forces.

By then, the west had good reason to fear that Africa had become an arena for al-Qaida, and that the failed state of Somalia could become a haven for the organisation’s operatives.

The bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 and the attack on an Israeli-owned hotel in Mombasa gave cause for such fears. So too did al-Qaida documents retrieved from Afghanistan that spoke of the organisation’s ambitions in the region, says Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert at Georgetown University and the Council on Global Terrorism. “That this was a primary area of concern,” he says.

In fact, says another analyst, the US was closely considering a strike on suspected al-Qaida cells in Somalia as early as 2002. That idea was abandoned.

But America’s concerns came to a head last year with the rise of the Islamic Courts Union. At first, Washington’s response was relatively modest. It mounted a small CIA operation, run from Nairobi, to stand up Somalia’s hated warlords against the Islamists, a former intelligence official familiar with the region says.

The under-the-radar approach was necessitated by the state department’s opposition to any type of military intervention in Somalia. Until the middle of last year, diplomats remained hopeful of negotiations between the Somali government and the Islamic Courts Union. That position, promoted by the state department’s top official for Africa, Jendayi Frazer, put diplomats on a collision course with the Pentagon.

By last June, when the Islamists seized Mogadishu, the Pentagon appeared to have won that bureaucratic struggle. By then, the CIA operation was widely acknowledged as a disaster. Talks on peace and power-sharing between the Somali president Abdullahi Yusuf’s government and Islamic courts were foundering. A Somalia analyst in Nairobi said the Islamists took most of the blame – unfairly, in his view, as the government had no intention of ever sharing power. “My guess is that a decision to wage war was taken sometime in October by Ethiopia and America. That was when people close to Yusuf appeared dead convinced that the Seventh Cavalry was going to appear. We thought it was a pipedream. It wasn’t.”

As the build-up to war continued, with Ethiopia sending more troops into Somalia and the Islamists moving closer to the government base in Baidoa, experts say the cooperation between Addis and Washington increased sharply.

Help from the sea was also required. Landlocked Ethiopia has no naval capacity, but the US could easily move warships from the Gulf to the Somali coast – as happened once the conflict began.

By mid-December Jendayi Frazer, the state department’s top official for Africa, was echoing the message from Addis Ababa about the dangers of the Islamic Courts Union. “The top layer of the courts are extremist to the core,” she said. “They are terrorists and they are in control.”

Days later, the Ethiopian forces were on the move. But many believe that America’s support for Ethiopia’s military intervention could come back to haunt the US, and predict a flare-up of Somali nationalist feeling. Already, clan fighting is threatening to jeopardise attempts to restore stability. This week there have been at least three attacks on government forces.

There is also concern that the precipitate flight of the ICU does not necessarily signal its definitive defeat. Last night, the Ethiopian-backed Somali government forces said they had captured the last remaining stronghold at Ras Kamboni, just two miles from the Kenyan border. It may not be the last confrontation between government forces and the Islamists.

“The Islamists have not all gone away. Many we believe continue to be in Mogadishu. They buried their weapons, and buried their uniforms, and they are lying low and letting the dust settle,” Mr Schroeder says.

Copyright The Guardian, 2007

Ethiopia destroyed Somalia Peace Talks: Speaker

Garowe News

January 13, 2007

The Speaker of Somalia’s interim parliament has criticized Ethiopia’s military intervention in Somalia, saying that Ethiopian troops cannot bring peace to areas formerly ruled by the Islamic Courts movement.

Speaker Sharif Hassan Sheikh Adan accused Ethiopia of destroying any chance of peace in Somalia by militarily supporting one group.

“Ethiopia was behind the collapse of the peace talks between the interim government and the Islamic Courts,” Speaker Sharif said from Djibouti, where he and 15 other Somali legislators were invited to.

The parliament Speaker refused to accept any notion that tanks would bring stability to Somalia after 16 years of war.

“I believe that the security created by the [Islamic] Courts during their 6-month rule cannot be recreated by Ethiopian troops, even if they stay in Somalia for another 6 years,” Speaker Sharif said.

The Speaker also criticized the role of the U.S. government in the ongoing Somali crisis: “America recently bombed civilians but said they were bombing ‘terrorists’…where are the terrorists?”

Speaker Sharif said the U.S. government wrongfully believes any Muslim with a long beard is an al-Qaeda terrorist or suspect, and appealed to the American government to stop bombarding innocent Somali civilians.

Recent “surgical airstrikes” by the U.S. military in southern Somalia targeting 3 suspected al-Qaeda terrorists failed, and instead killed 70 civilians, according to UK-based aid agency Oxfam.

Speaker Sharif Hassan and his 15-member parliament delegation recently left Nairobi, Kenya, after the Kenyan government issued a decree ordering their leave.

Kenya, which supports the interim Somali government and the Ethiopian intervention, ordered the lawmakers’ leave because they opposed the Somali government’s pro-Ethiopian intervention policies.

Copyright Garowe News, 2007

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Global Research

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]