A New Terror Threat?

2 01 2010

A New Terror Threat?The Root, 26 December 2009.

What the Nigerian plane bomber reveals about Africa, America and terror in the 21st century.

On Christmas Day, a clatter, a puff of smoke and a brief, terrifying flame: Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, a 23-year-old Nigerian passenger on a Northwest Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Detroit, had allegedly tried to blow up his airplane. Others aboard the airliner quickly subdued the man, a former University College of London student who claims to have ties to Al-Qaeda and been supplied with explosives from Yemen. The plane landed safely in Detroit, where Mutallab was treated for third degree burns, and where federal police officially charged him with attempting to destroy the jet.

Airport security increased dramatically in several airports in the United States and in Europe as a result of the incident. But this latest botched act of terrorism has wider implications: it raises important questions about sources of new threats to the West, the actual level of U.S. competence in guarding against terror, and yet another American effort to build an important relationship with a fragile, unstable country.

Scrutiny has focused on Muhammad Murtallah International Airport in Lagos, from which Mutallab departed on Christmas Eve. As recently as Thanksgiving 2009, the Nigerian airport was deemed compliant with air safety protocols set by the American Transportation Security Administration and the Nigerian Civil Aviation Association—though over the last decade, it has been intermittently placed on TSA watchlists as one of the least secure airports in the world. Mutallab did not undergo secondary security screening at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam before boarding his flight for the U.S.

Since the failed bombing, reportedly involving PETN, a highly volatile explosive, Al-Qaeda-affiliated groups in Yemen have claimed credit for training Mutallab—though no U.S. government officials have confirmed those connections. Nevertheless, authorities have called the incident “an attempted terrorist attack”, and president Barack Obama is “actively” monitoring the situation as it develops, according to the White House.

It’s not clear that Mutallab’s actions represent an Al-Qaeda comeback. But the suspect’s Nigerian connections introduce African affairs into what has been seen, since 9/11, as a primarily Middle Eastern threat.

Read the rest of this entry »





New World Order

28 09 2009

“New World Order,” The Root, 24 September 2009.

How the Group of 8 became the G20.

g20NEW YORK—On the eve of the international political conference in Pittsburgh known as the Group of 20, President Barack Obama addressed a packed main hall of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Making his first appearance before the international diplomatic and peacekeeping body, Obama stressed that expectations of global cooperation now drive American foreign policy.

“In an era when our destiny is shared, power is no longer a zero sum game,” he said. “No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold. The traditional division between nations of the south and north makes no sense in an interconnected world.”

After eight years of unilateralism under George W. Bush, the message of outreach and inclusion was received with enthusiastic applause. But as Obama lands in Pittsburgh, it’s worth remembering that until recently, a smaller, more elite group of eight countries dominated global discussion. Leaders from those nations will have their own meetings during the two-day conference devoted to climate change, nuclear security and restabilizing the global economy. Yet it’s almost guaranteed that you’ll hear more about the G20 than the G8. Suddenly, the organization, created in 1975, is “no longer the board of directors of the world,” but a more inclusive organization, said David Wessel of the Wall Street Journal, while addressing the Council on Foreign Relations last week.

But just when did the G8 become the G20?

Originally, the G8 was the Group of 7—which included finance ministers from the U.S., Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan. In 1998, it became the G8 for “political reasons,” according to former President Bill Clinton. The massive and resurgent Russian Federation could no longer be credibly excluded from the debate. Similarly, says Clinton, the dozen other countries at this week’s G20 gathering have earned a seat at the table by representing the increasingly diverse elements of a more interdependent world order. “It’s not a bipolar world, as it was during the Cold War, not a polar world, as it was briefly in the aftermath of the Cold War,” Clinton told The Root.

Read the rest of this entry »





“Turkey: Front Door to Middle East Peace?”

7 04 2009

Turkey: Front Door to Middle East Peace?The American Prospect, 5 April 2009.

Taking the message of European unity to Turkey, Obama strategically bridges East and West.

Par2494840

As Barack Obama and his caravan of diplomats, handlers, and hangers-on complete the last leg of his first European tour as president, America’s pied piper has one more gift to bestow. After a week spent in the halls of the United States’ older Atlantic allies, Air Force One landed in the Turkish capital of Ankara today.

Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush, did not travel to Turkey until 2004 — and then only for the same annual NATO summit Obama wrapped up in Strasbourg on Friday. Obama only just met Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey last week at the G-20 and European Union summits. That the U.S. president is literally going the extra miles to Turkey speaks volumes about the Obama administration’s determination to honor the Islamist democracy as America’s best bridge to the ever-turbulent Middle East.

The president recently told lawmakers on Capitol Hill that he was “keeping score” when it comes to support for his domestic agenda — and the same could be said of his foreign policy. It’s not just that Turkey, which shares a border with Iraq, has been a crucial partner in basing and troop arrangements during the six-year occupation. (Seventy percent of military supplies in Iraq, from food to ammunition, pass through Turkey, and its air force provides support for the American logistical supply chain in Afghanistan.) Turkey is a bilateral partner in the NATO alliance to which it has belonged since 1952 and a major variable in the energy equation in the Caucasus region it straddles, from the Balkans on the west coast to the Iranian regime directly to its south. Turkey also filled the vacuum left by American diplomatic intransigence during the Bush years, maintaining good relations with Iran, Syria, and even Hamas in Palestine — all while guarding its strong rapport with Israel, with whom it will start performing naval exercises this summer.

Speaking to the Turkish Parliament today, Obama offered effusive praise: “Turkey’s greatness lies in your ability to be at the center of things. This is not where East and West divide — it is where they come together. In the beauty of your culture. In the richness of your history. In the strength of your democracy,” he said.

Having expanded their diplomatic footprint, the Turks perhaps deserve to be bathed in a little of that Obama sunshine. “Turkey has raised the bar for political sophistication in the region,” says Daniel Levy, co-director of the Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation. “They’ve done what the U.S. cannot do,” adds Amjad Atallah, Levy’s co-director at New America. “They’ve shown how you can be Israel’s ally and not support Israel’s occupation. They’re showing Arab countries like Egypt and Jordan how they can be allies of Israel and not support Israel’s excesses.”

But don’t be fooled: This two-city trip will not occasion the Grand Speech to the Muslim World that Obama has pledged to deliver from an Islamic capital in the first year of his presidency. Rather, putting Ankara and Istanbul on the same itinerary as London and Prague sends a clear message about the White House’s support for Turkish integration into the European community — still controversial, both in Turkey and within the EU. Spencer Boyer, director of international law and diplomacy in the national-security program of the Center for American Progress, had recommended that Obama frame any trip to Turkey in a European context, “to demonstrate that the United States considers Turkish membership in the EU and stronger ties to the West to be an important strategic objective.”

Read the rest of this entry »





“China’s Long March Across Africa”

15 08 2008

China’s Long March Across Africa,” The Root, 6 August 2008.

Despite Western suspicions, China is offering concrete solutions to Africa’s economic woes.

By now, we’re used to seeing foreign fingers in the African pot. For the latest act of this timeless drama, one need look no further than the Chinatown in Lagos, Nigeria. For years, a small community of Chinese workers ran restaurants or sold textiles in the city; today, however, a walled-off square is brimming with Chinese traders and business ventures. China’s Huawei, a telecommunications giant, boasts a downtown Lagos office with 600 foreign workers. There are already more Chinese living in Nigeria than there were Britons during the height of the empire. In similar hubs in cities from Johannesburg and Cape Town to Dakar and Casablanca, the decade-long project known playfully as “ChinAfrica” is exploding the old economic order.

Bilateral friendships have bloomed along with African pagodas, as 48 of the 53 African governments have broadened or initiated ties with China’s juggernaut economy. Angola has become China’s No. 1 source for imported oil, having surpassed Saudi Arabia in 2006. Sudan is also a leading energy partner. Mozambique and Zambia provide timber and copper. As China seeks to play in the Middle East, Egypt is an essential political ally, while in eastern Africa, Kenya and Ethiopia are important hubs for commerce and foreign relations.

China’s expanding footprint across Africa has raised hackles, both on the continent and in the West. China’s indifference to human rights, labor and environmental standards—a tense component of many Western business agreements—is proudly ignored on the continent. And China has displayed a brash willingness to cozy up to and deal with despotic and corrupt governments—chief among them, Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe and the genocidal regime in Khartoum.

But, perhaps most importantly, China has not had to grapple with the colonial hangover that has plagued European countries and, to a lesser extent, the United States. Speaking recently of Western military involvement on the continent, Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, said as much. “You risk the backlash from the people, from the legacy that was left in Africa because of the era of colonialism,” he warned. And when it comes to development and commerce, Westerners still appear to believe more in humanitarian aid than in humanitarian trade.

As a result, African nations—whose long-term needs are better met with roads and steel than with 10-point plans—find laissez-faire China a more attractive partner. This dynamic does not apply to every country in Africa, or to every Chinese business deal. But despite uncomfortable echoes of imperialism, in practice China is the only global power laying the tracks for an Africa-wide economic renaissance.

Read the rest of this entry »





“French Kisses”

11 02 2008

“French Kisses,” December 2007

Why does Rudy Giuliani keep kissing up to France’s new president?

For months now, across America, Rudy Giuliani has shown Tom Cruise-like enthusiasm about France. He can’t get enough of his old friend and political soulmate, French president Nicolas Sarkozy. Between shills for Testimony, Sarkozy’s bestselling political memoir, in Iowa and New Hampshire, and effusive praise for his counterpart’s inroads on tax reform–“even in France!”– French-kissing has become an unusual and defining trait of Giuliani’s presidential campaign. Woven into the ex-mayor’s stump speech is an absurd tale of a “recurring dream” in which “socialist” Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards are booted to France and pro-business Sarkozy is imported to the U.S. In Sarkozy, Rudy sees an idealized version of himself: Flouting a system built on liberal pieties, he’s tough, conservative, presidential, and dating an ex-model. But Giuliani’s obsession with Sarkozy does more than highlight the surrealism of watching a leader in love: It reveals major fault lines in Rudy’s plan for world leadership.

Giuliani Testimony
Similarities between the two politicians have been trumpeted in the press since Sarkozy’s stint as Minister of the Interior, the top cop of France. The pair first met in 2002, when Rudy was flown in to discuss urban crime. Sarkozy, who has also adopted a hyperactive, take-no-prisoners style of governance, has always been generous in his admiration of Giuliani’s work as mayor of New York. When the New York Post ran a cover touting Sarkozy’s May presidential victory with the headline “A French Rudy,” Giuliani proudly brandished it at a speech the same week. And while Hillary Clinton is no Segolène Royal, early comments on the French election results bolstered his case: “A conservative, strong-on-security kind of guy running against a liberal woman. Sound familiar?”

In October, “Sarko L’Americain” gave a mollifying speech to Congress, making peace over Iraq and emphasizing commonalities between America and the French republic. As his own electoral fortunes diminish, Guiliani would surely love to cash in on the resulting Sarkozy swoon. The problem is that Giuliani’s case for himself as the “American Sarko” falls apart under closer inspection.

Upon hearing of Sarkozy’s hard-won budget, for example, which will cut the number of government workers in France by one-third, Giuliani upped the ante, pledging a 50 percent reduction in the American civil service during his presidency. He repeated the promise during a recent Republican debate, advocating “technology” as a vague justification. But the pledge rests on a gross misreading of the American government. In France’s bloated public sector, state employees number more, retire earlier and work less annually than in the U.S.; entitlements reign and efficiency suffers as a result. Sarkozy’s budget dictates such cuts in the name of competitiveness and a new work ethic for an economy whose growth has dawdled for a decade. Giuliani’s plan, on the other hand, has been called a “drive-by shooting,” wherein skilled workers across the board would be sacked to honor the GOP fixation with small government. Perhaps Rudy forgets that his most-favored departments of homeland security and defense account for half the federal payroll. Rather than parroting Sarkozy, a more nuanced strategy for America’s relatively trim civil service would be a precise redistribution of workers, shifting the focus from administration to more front-line support in overworked agencies like FEMA and the INS—a strategy that would make Rudy’s red-meat platitudes about immigration or crisis management sound more credulous.

Of course, the big differences between the politicians can be explained away by time and context. In classically rightist fashion, both working-class politicians espouse accountability and individual responsibility as a civic philosophy. Immigration reform has been a key plank of both presidential platforms. Sarkozy’s often repeated call for the French to “work more to earn more” sounds suspiciously like the “one city, one standard” slogan Giuliani stumped with during his first successful run for mayor. Both men are also leaders who matched a political moment. Like New Yorkers in 1993, a French public fed up with the status quo claims to be ready for “Czarkozy” and his campaign for discipline. His UMP party won June parliamentary elections convincingly, and at the height of chaotic transport strikes in October and November–perhaps by force of French habit–some 8,000 Sarkozy supporters convened a protest against the protests in Paris.

Read the rest of this entry »





“B(l)ack to the Future?”

11 02 2008

“B(l)ack to the future?” Sphere Magazine, December 2006

Leopold Senghor Billet Fifty years ago Léopold Sédar Senghor, esteemed patriarch of African letters in French, took a ride on the train from Tours to Paris, a trip which, in 1956, was only 10 French francs. With Senghor, dozens of other black artists, from Africa, the Caribbean and North America, made their own journeys to Paris for the First International Congress of Negro Writers and Artists, sponsored by Présence Africaine in September of that year and commemorated this fall by UNESCO and Harvard’s Du Bois Institute. The ticket is pricier now, but the 2006 gathering—held on the same dates in the same place in the same storied city—offered still-living original participants and leaders of the contemporary black intellectual and artistic world the chance to make a pilgrimage to the site that, in 1956, served as midwife to a new black cultural destiny.

Présence Africaine founder Alioune Diop had, since 1947, been encouraging the process of free creative expression for blacks in his native Senegal and around the francophone world. His title, as the first internationally circulated magazine of African letters, was the ideal vehicle for a real-life intellectual and literary exchange. The Paris Congress was the culmination of the publication’s efforts to date, attended by pillars of black aesthetic and political history such as Richard Wright, Aimé Césaire, René Depestre, David Diop, Frantz Fanon and the venerable Senghor himself. For a memorable three days, the very center of Paris became a melting pot for cultural dialogue, fraternity and debate.

The participants, met at the Sorbonne, were as diverse as the term “Noir” could then suggest. Also in attendance were a squadron of politically committed Haitian writers, an editor of NAACP magazine The Crisis, poets from Dahomey (now Benin) and Madagascar, sculptors and painters from Nigeria and the editor of a magazine representing the Belgian Congo.

Paris Conference Organizers

These men and more enacted an early notion of black solidarity in diaspora. Diop’s opening address notes: “We have then, we others of the non-European world, to provoke, all of us, new values, to explore together the new universes born out of the meeting of peoples.”

A litany of written RSVPs to the Congress invite, published in a period Présence Africaine, express similar passion for the global project, as well as a belief in the intrinsic value of such focused and thoughtful interaction. Figures like Claude Lévi-Strauss, W. E. B. Du Bois and Picasso—who created a pen and ink poster specifically for the 1956 Congress—were among the dozens of well-wishers. A telegram from one Julien Blérald, 7000 km away in Fort-de-France, Martinique, bears out the breathless energy of the moment:

 

Enthusiastic Hello first cultural Congress black men stop Present Heart spirit stop We follow passionately grand unfolding event stop Congratulations Présence Africaine stop Convinced brilliant new success for Paris stop.

This idea of pan-African and pan-Atlantic black solidarity may, through a 2006 lens, seem routine, but stated in 1956 the aims of the conference were revolutionary enough to merit such excitement. The fifty intervening years between the original congress and its 2006 incarnation has found black creativity in the west and all across the diaspora flourishing, circulating images and ideas to the enrichment of both artist and audience.

Perhaps the most delightful fact about the first Congress is that the entire history of the black Atlantic world after 1956—the wave of independence that would begin its sweep through Africa in only a year, the Civil Rights movement in America, the Cold War, then in infancy, the end of apartheid—all these had not yet occurred. That over 40 promising and enterprising black artists and writers converged at the Sorbonne, that palace of wisdom, in a room consecrated to the philosopher Descartes, speaks to a remarkably early “globalized” consciousness.

Also telling: for most of the luminaries that made their way to the Amphithéâtre Descartes, 1956 was an early point along a trajectory of cultural influence and impact that none could then have predicted. Besides Senghor and poet Aimé Césaire, his partner in the negritude movement, American Richard Wright may be the only delegate to the Congress to have been well- and widely- known, for works like Black Boy and Native Son. The others were members of a young academic avant-garde, green but committed, earnestly engaged with their pan-ethnic project and training themselves, it seems, for the tasks the latter half of the 20th century would bring.

Given until 2006 the roster would include two presidents of Senegal and the namesake of its national university, an ambassador to Great Britain, the first black tenured professor at the University of Pennsylvania, and many true legends of the black intelligentsia. But the Présence Africaine Congress catalogue contains “notices bibliographiques” on 1956 delegates that are in many cases, terribly premature.

Delegate Frantz Fanon was listed as a “doctor in psychiatric hospitals”, with only the first of his many landmark studies, “Black Skin, White Masks,” published to date. Abdoulaye Wade, current president of Senegal (elected in 2000) was listed in the briefest of entries, as a “legal trainee”. Barbadian novelist and critic George Lamming had then only published his first, well-loved novel In the Castle of My Skin, though over a dozen other novels and collections of essays were to follow.

@ Place Sorbonne, 1956

So the First International Congress of Negro Writers and Artists brought together the makers of the modern black intellectual agenda—no small feat—and did it at a pivotal moment for both the individual and the century. The legacies of the Congress are many; the gathering gave birth to pioneering notions of cultural diversity and plural identities; Présence Africaine, impressive in scope and in durability, continues to champion black creative efforts through its Paris-based publishing house; and I, working as an archivist this summer for Henry Louis Gates, Jr., UNESCO and the Du Bois Institute organizational team, caught a glimpse at the architects of the black intellectual century at an age not much older that my own—an encouraging prospect in any time.

Partners like UNESCO, Gates, Nigerian Nobel winner Wole Soyinka and other heavyweights have made their own journey to Paris this year. The airfare is worth it—they are champions of an homage to the old order, which insists that, as Aimé Césaire said in the leadup to the Congress: “The shortest path to the future is always the one that involves looking deeper into the past.”

Sur Ferry, 1956

Dayo Olopade

(photographs courtesy Du Bois Institute/Présence Africaine)





“Europe’s ‘Statement’ is Darfur’s Downfall”

8 02 2008

Europe’s ‘Statement’ is Darfur’s Downfall,” Yale Daily News, 16 November 2004

Kevin Carter’s Pulitzer-winning photograph

As a vulture patiently waits, a young Sudanese boy drags himself toward a refugee camp a kilometer away. Kevin Carter, recipient of the 1994 Pulitzer Prize, took a photo of this scene three months before killing himself. Such is the grief of practicing journalism in a world of horror. The tragedy is that the photo is timeless. Ten years later, Sudan is still on fire.

With this photo in mind, I write with the intention of highlighting a grave insincerity in international affairs of late: The diplomatic fallout surrounding Iraq has made the issue of saving Sudan purely political.

Let me make clear that I did not support the war in Iraq. There were flaws in both the U.S. and U.N. approaches to the whole mess. But to all the nations that whined and shuffled their feet in the buildup to war in Iraq, shame on you for holding a grudge when it comes to Darfur. Irrespective of the sickly green distaste we share for America’s unilateral foreign policy, the bottom line is that you are hypocrites.

For fairness’ sake, let me specify exactly to whom I refer when I make such admittedly rash generalizations: France.

I am a Francophile from way back; my appreciation for the culture and language is well-documented. However, it is unacceptable to me that a supposed global power (whose status as such is imminently debatable) has been allowed to play the childish contrarian in matters of real human suffering.

I stood in the French capital the day war was declared in Iraq and shook my fist among the protesters at Concorde. I opposed the WMD argument and cast my vote as an American against the administration that forced this terrible situation down our throats. But France and other nations have not moved beyond high-school politics in their world outlook. Post-Iraq pouting on the global stage is causing loss of life on a massive scale. Abroad, these nations have picked their battles on the flimsiest of policies, really just one: No matter what, let’s not do anything.

Read the rest of this entry »