THE GENERAL LEADING the U.S. military’s hidden war in Africa says the continent is now home to nearly 50 terrorist organizations and “illicit groups” that threaten U.S. interests. And today, gunmen reportedly yelling “Allahu Akbar” stormed the Radisson Blu hotel in Mali’s capital and seized several dozen hostages. U.S. special operations forces are “currently assisting hostage recovery efforts,” a Pentagon spokesperson said, and U.S. personnel have “helped move civilians to secured locations, as Malian forces clear the hotel of hostile gunmen.”
In Mali, groups like Ansar Dine and the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa have long posed a threat. Major terrorist groups in Africa include al Shabaab, Boko Haram and al Qaeda in the Islamic Magreb (AQIM). In the wake of the Paris attacks by ISIS, attention has been drawn to ISIS affiliates in Egypt and Libya, too. But what are the dozens of other groups in Africa that the Pentagon is fighting with more special operations forces, more outposts, and more missions than ever?
For the most part, the Pentagon won’t say.
Brig. Gen. Donald Bolduc, chief of U.S. Special Operations Command Africa, made a little-noticed comment earlier this month about these terror groups. After describing ISIS as a transnational and transregional threat, he went on to tell the audience of the Defense One Summit, “Although ISIS is a concern, so is al Shabaab, so is the Lord’s Resistance Army in Central Africa and the 43 other illicit groups that operate in the area … Boko Haram, AQIM, and other small groups in that area.”
Bolduc mentioned only a handful of terror groups by name, so I asked for clarification from the Department of Defense, Africa Command (Africom), and Special Operations Command Africa (SOCAFRICA). None offered any names, let alone a complete accounting. SOCAFRICA did not respond to multiple queries by The Intercept. Africom spokesperson Lt. Cmdr. Anthony Falvo would only state, “I have nothing further for you.”
While the State Department maintains a list of foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs), including 10 operating in Africa (ISIS, Boko Haram, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, al Shabaab, AQIM, Ansaru, Ansar al-Din, Ansar al-Shari’a in Tunisia, as well as Libya’s Ansar al-Shari’a in Benghazi and Ansar al-Shari’a in Darnah), it “does not provide the DoD any legal or policy approval,” according to Lt. Col. Michelle Baldanza, a Defense Department spokesperson.
“The DoD does not maintain a separate or similar list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations for the government,” she said in an email to The Intercept. “In general, not all groups of armed individuals on the African continent that potentially present a threat to U.S. interests would be subject to FTO. DoD works closely with the Intel Community, Inter-Agency, and the [National Security Council] to continuously monitor threats to U.S. interests; and when required, identifies, tracks, and presents options to mitigate threats to U.S. persons overseas.”
This isn’t the first time the Defense Department has been unable or unwilling to name the groups it’s fighting. In 2013, The Intercept’s Cora Currier, then writing for ProPublica, asked for a full list of America’s war-on-terror enemies and was told by a Pentagon spokesperson that public disclosure of the names could increase the prestige and recruitment prowess of the groups and do “serious damage to national security.” Jack Goldsmith, a professor at Harvard Law School who served as a legal counsel during the George W. Bush administration, told Currier that the Pentagon’s rationale was weak and there was a “very important interest in the public knowing who the government is fighting against in its name.”
The secret of whom the U.S. military is fighting extends to Africa. Since 9/11, U.S. military efforts on the continent have grown in every conceivable way, from funding and manpower to missions and outposts, while at the same time the number of transnational terror groups has increased in linear fashion, according to the military. The reasons for this are murky. Is it a spillover from events in the Middle East and Central Asia? Are U.S. operations helping to spawn and spread terror groups? Is the Pentagon inflating the terror threat for its own gain? Is the rise of these terrorist organizations due to myriad local factors? Or more likely, is it a combination of these and other reasons? The task of answering these questions is made more difficult when no one in the military is willing to name more than a handful of the transnational terror groups that are classified as America’s enemies.
Before 9/11, Africa seemed to be free of transnational terror threats, according to the U.S. government.
In 2000, for example, a report prepared under the auspices of the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute examined the “African security environment.” While noting the existence of “internal separatist or rebel movements” in “weak states,” as well as militias and “warlord armies,” it made no mention of Islamic extremism or major transnational terror threats.
In early 2002, a senior Pentagon official speaking on background told reporters that the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan might drive “terrorists” out of that nation and into Africa. “Terrorists associated with al Qaeda and indigenous terrorist groups have been and continue to be present in this region,” he said. “These terrorists will, of course, threaten U.S. personnel and facilities.”
Pressed about genuine transnational threats, the official drew attention to Somali militants, specifically several hundred members of al Itihaad al Islamiya — a forerunner of al Shabaab — but admitted that even the most extreme members “really have not engaged in acts of terrorism outside Somalia.” Questioned about ties between Osama bin Laden’s core al Qaeda group and African militants, the official offered tenuous links, like bin Laden’s “salute” to Somali fighters who killed U.S. troops during the infamous 1993 Black Hawk Down incident.
The U.S. nonetheless deployed military personnel to Africa in 2002, while the State Department launched a big-budget counterterrorism program, known as the Pan Sahel Initiative, to enhance the capabilities of the militaries of Chad, Mali, Mauritania, and Niger. In 2005, that program expanded to include Algeria, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal, and Tunisia and was renamed the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership.
In the years that followed, the U.S. increased its efforts. In 2014, for example, the U.S. carried out 674 military missions across the continent — an average of nearly two per day and an increase of about 300 percent since U.S. Africa Command was launched in 2008. The U.S. also took part in a number of multinational military interventions, including a coalition war in Libya, assistance to French and African forces fighting militants in Central African Republic and Mali, and the training and funding of African proxies to do battle against extremist groups like al Shabaab and Boko Haram.
The U.S. has also carried out a shadow war of special ops raids, drone strikes and other attacks, as well as an expanding number of training missions by elite forces. U.S. special operations teams are now deployed to 23 African countries “seven days a week, 24/7,” according to Bolduc. “The most effective thing that we do is about 1,400 SOF operators and supporters integrated with our partner nation, integrated with our allies and other coalition partners in a way that allows us to take advantage of each other’s capabilities,” he said.
The U.S. military has also set up a network of bases — although it is loath to refer to them in such terms. A recent report by The Intercept, relying on classified documents leaked by a whistleblower, detailed an archipelago of outposts integral to a secret drone assassination program that was based at the premier U.S. facility on the African continent, Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti. That base alone has expanded since 2002 from 88 acres to nearly 600 acres, with more than $600 million allocated or awarded for projects and $1.2 billion in construction and improvements planned for the future.
A continent relatively free of transnational terror threats in 2001 is — after almost 14 years of U.S. military efforts — now rife with them, in the Pentagon’s view. Bolduc said the African continent is “as lethal and dangerous an environment as anywhere else in the world,” and specifically invoked ISIS, which he called “a transnational threat, a transregional threat, as are all threats that we deal with in Africa.” But the Pentagon would not specify whether the threat levels are stable, increasing, or decreasing. “I can’t get into any details regarding threats or future operations,” Lt. Col. Baldanza stated. “I can say that we will continue to work with our African partners to enable them in their counterterrorism efforts as they further grow security and stability in the region.”
In the end, Bolduc tempered expectations that his troops might be able to transform the region in any significant way. “The military can only get you so far,” he told the Defense One Summit audience. “So if I’m asked to build a counter-violent extremist organization capability in a particular country, I can do that … but if there’s not … a valid institution to plug it into, then we are there for a long time.”
Top photo: Republic of Mali and U.S. Special Operations Forces troops stand in formation during the opening ceremony of the Flintlock 10 Exercise held May 3, 2010, in Bamako, Mali.
Question: Suppose I am a superpower in a modern world where there is always an eye (a.k.a Press) watching. How can I make sure I have a presence and control in every part of the world, and still appear to be a hero, savior to the eye?
Answer: The way the USA responds to terrorism would probably one of the most subtle way to go.
-Pre 9/11 Africa had virtually no terrorism and no US presence; now it has both in abundance.- It’s fairly obvious the DOD operates in Africa to create terror…on behalf of corporate interests…to destabilize/topple countries that resist full US domination, like the US did with Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, and routinely does in Latin America, Asia and the South Pacific. The DOD wont’ name the other “terrorist” groups because they’re likely on the DOD’s payroll.
This article ignores completely the fact that Saudi Arabia and other fundamental regimes have been funding radical Islamic teaching across Africa over the past 20 years. Of course the Americans are playing into their hands by providing a ready ‘crusading’ enemy but it is simplistic to imply that all these movements were caused by American interventions.
Don’t let us call it American, as USA is only the primary vassal of Bankster Empire of Deception!
Involvements of vassals like Wahabi Sauds or Qatari MuslimBrothers are of less importance! They obey orders!
Look here for more:
#War in #Syria, #Iraq, #Yemen is on #water & #energy!
#SRM #Troposphere #oil #gas
http://geoarchitektur.blogspot.de/2015/07/war-on-water-krieg-um-wasser.html
American foreign policy has now become the equivalent of snuff porn, there is nothing that is not obscene about it. To read about it is to enter the excremental and murderous world of the marquis de Sade.
Keep up the excellent, insightful journalism.
With a colonial legacy of either weak democracies or dictators in combination with politics divided down ethic lines with an abundance of valuable mineral resources it not hard to understand that there is room to operate for non state organizations.
It easy to understand to that political forces in the US have vested interest in wanting some control over those in power so American interests can capitalize on the resources as we do in the middle east.
I doubt the realpolitik descendants of Kissinger and Dulles that make up US foreign policy give a rats ass about terrorism. The real intent who be to maintain access to the natural resources of the continent. Just as we saw in the middle east like Iraq and Afghanistan to use of military force investment in infrastructure and development was enough to allow western business access to oil resources but not enough to maintain order to a level that a strong central government would form.
My guess is the use of the US of the Military in Africa will follow the same lines to maintain some minimal level of order and deal with anyone who shares their ideals even if it is cut throat dictators similar to Charles Taylor, Mobutu, Idi Amin . This Military in Africa build up may also foreshadow a proxy war between the Developed West and the Chinese which have made big inroads in the eastern part of the continent.
There is no such thing as a “hidden war” by any common definition*. This is not to say the ‘U.S. military is not fighting in Mali and the rest of Africa’ … call it what you want, but it is
not a ‘war’.
*Most classical definitions (wiki/webster etc.) describe war as a state of armed conflict between nations/states or, even more broadly, societies. That distinction seems important for a host of reasons imo; most notably an ability of the warring nations/states/societies to reach a conclusion. One party to the ‘war’ is defeated, the other victorious.
**Evidently, it is only through the fig-leaf of the ‘fog of war’ that France can now, under the cover of ‘war’, claim some kind of legitimacy to bomb human beings in the nations of Syria and Iraq with the certain knowledge that the vast majority of the peoples being killed had *nothing whatsoever to do with the Paris attacks*. Ibid, the destruction of Doctors Without Borders hospital (also, a French outfit) in Afghanistan. .. ‘mistakes’ like that only happen in ‘war’.
I am truly devastated by all of the tragedy that has circulated around this event in Mali. These senseless acts of terror are meant to tear apart at the fabrics of our society.
Before you move on with your day, I hope you can make a small donation to help my indiegogo campaign and share it with your friends in defense of all the innocent killed and injured in the attacks. Your donation will benefit and directly support the victims in this catastrophe with aid, supplies, and other financial assistance opportunities. Not to mention, you get some pretty cool perks too!
Please keep all of the individuals affected in recent attacks in your prayers and send out only good vibes to others.
Sincerely,
Jessica
https://www.generosity.com/emergencies-fundraising/pray-for-mali-help-the-victims
America was always like this it smells when they try to cover it up 100million murders and counting
Great article & great responces from the responders in the comments section (as usual).
Well-written and -organized, Nick. Good piece!
It may also be timely, today, to revisit something Glenn wrote for the Graun, nearly three years ago. Please forgive the long blockquote:
Source: “The bombing of Mali highlights all the lessons of western intervention”
Latest on the hotel.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/20/gunmen-take-hostages-radisson-hotel-mali-bamako
“…that threaten U.S. interests…”
IOW, if Africans won’t give up their bountiful natural resources without complaint, the U.S. will take them by force, killing all who resist.
Nick Turse was on Democracy Now the other day where he declared the US’s barbarity in places like Africa and the ME are “good intentions”. As the Wikileaks files have just further confirmed, the US and its Western allies have done anything and everything to prevent the independence and development of Africa, including the ousting of Gaddafi (who had brought stability and kept terrorist out of the region). Stability and independence of Africa is a nightmare for the US and its allies, and Africans know this.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/02/15/the-wests-war-against-african-development-continues/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/09/09/americas-imperial-footprint-in-africa/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/10/20/libya-from-africas-wealthiest-democracy-under-gaddafi-to-terrorist-haven-after-us-intervention/
Honestly, how after all the destruction and suffering the US and its allies like the UK have brought to every corner of the world (and after all of the documented evidence – including leaks and whistleblowers) a person like Turse could still have the stupidity and gall to declare the U.S.’s crimes are out of “good intentions” is beyond me. People like Nick Turse are a part of the problem because they don’t tell the whole truth…
America’s Motto: All war, all the time, all over the globe, forever for “our interests”.
I sure wish every journalist in the world would put “America’s interests” or “our interests” in quotes or italics every time it is used because it is just about the most nebulous if not meaningless propaganda trope ever invented. Until the world’s journalists start trying to pin down America’s political, economic, intelligence and military elites to objectively define what those “interests” are all over the globe, then I’d argue even parroting the use of the word is a form of (un)intentionally catapulting the US government’s propaganda.
Seems to me The Intercept should designate one journalist or a team to spend a year interviewing everyone it can in a position of power, and then write a longform piece on exactly what America’s elites believe “our interests” to be all over the globe. And don’t let them roll right into another propaganda trope like “our interests” are to ensure the “security” of our nation. Because that’s just more circular fucking propaganda of the highest order.
Just a thought. But every time a journalist employs the term America’s “interests” it perpetuates the idea that there is such a thing all over the globe in the first instance. And if that’s the case somebody should be forced to define precisely what they believe that to be.
I agree with your analysis of US interests as a propaganda term and the need for a long term study, even though it would probably be met with the propaganda of ‘its classified’ and ‘will threaten US security’. Empire’s will never speak their actual intentions. Though if you watch Mehdi Hasan interview former DIS director Michael Flynn, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG3j8OYKgn4 you can get a glimpse of what journalism should be, and how it can pierce a blow to the bubble of empire.
It’s simple, really. ‘US Interests’ means one thing: Wall Street Profits. Look at how the war industry stocks jumped after the Paris attacks. If the US government really gave a damn about keeping the US public safe, they would enact strong environmental and gun laws, cut back on fossil fuels (the US military being the #1 comsumer) and fix the aging infrastructure, instead of endangering us further by creating hordes of vengeful young men by their murderous wars. But today’s Democrats (with B. Sanders a rare exception) suckle the Big Money teat as voraciously as Republicans, so, unless ordinary Americans wake up and throw them out, expect the violence tap to keep flowing on all sides.
General Eisenhower warned us about these guys. No prizes for guessing what Bolduc recommends we do about absence of “valid” institutions he is positing in African nations…. use U.S. taxpayer money (and whatever in-country resources can be redirected away from health and education and other such frivolities) to pay private sector military contractors to build them.