In the ongoing war on terrorism, the United States and its allies should address with particular attention two main problems:

1. a) The problem of failed states such as Somalia or weak states unable of fully controlling their territory, therefore functioning as breeding grounds for terrorists or as their safe- havens. Adding to this the porous borders of African states enabling easy trans-border linkages and in this respect Africa should be considered the soft under-belly of the western war on global terrorism.  The problem of African states whose governments officially or unofficially sponsor or cooperate with international terrorist networks.

The importance of these two issues has also been endorsed by a former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs (1997 to 2001) Elizabeth Rice, when she admitted that the US “need(s) to continue to strengthen and expand intelligence-sharing and law enforcement cooperation with countries that can help [the US] to wrap up al-Qaeda operatives, cells, and finances…(the)United States must provide weak states with substantial counterterrorism assistance to help strengthen their immigration controls, customs regimes, and airport security.”[1]

1. b) The growing importance of African oil resources constitutes the economic/strategic importance of African states for the US but also for the EU and other countries. This is partly due to the growing instability of the Middle East (particularly Saudi Arabia) but also due to the developments in other parts of the world. The United States is becoming well aware of the importance of these developments, which is also expressed by the fact that it is already planning several small military bases in remote African spots, which are for use against terrorists, but also to protect the superpower’s growing interests in the region.[2]

To secure these economic and security interests of the US and its allies in the region, the problem of African stability must be addressed with particular attention. In the final paragraph I will elaborate on three crucial issues which I find most important regarding this objective:

1. foreign aid;
2. flow of foreign direct investments (FDI), and;
3. the notion of good-governance states.

In this study paper I will not deal with the issue of Sudan, whose putting on the list of states sponsors of terrorism (1993) and imposition of sanctions (1997)[3] for its “continued support for international terrorism, ongoing efforts to destabilize neighboring governments…constituting an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States” is well known.[4]

I would like to focus attention on other two African states/region (Somalia, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Burkina-Fasso) whose governance poses serious problems in dealing with international terrorism.

What has changed since September 11 is the realization that poverty and failed states can breed terrorism and become safe-havens for terrorists.[5] As president George W. Bush points out “when governments fail to meet the most basic needs of their people, these failed states can become havens for terror”. One good example of such a country is Somalia, which has been without a central government since its last president Mohamed Siad Barre fled the country in 1991 and fighting amongst various military factions broke out.

Although Somalia is not listed as a state sponsor of terrorism, “the Bush administration is concerned about terrorist centres in Somalia and regards the country as a likely alternative safe haven for bin Laden and his associates-if they leave Afghanistan”.[6]

According to US intelligence reports Somalia has served as a regional base for Al Qaeda operations since 1993, when bin Laden first provided help to warlord Mohamed Aideed[7], who was the leading figure of Somali National Alliance until his death in 1996. The same year, his son Hussain Aideed took over the leadership of the Alliance, which since October 2000 represents one of the six opposition factions against the interim government (formed the same month).[8] Al-Qaeda also maintains close ties with the radical Somali Islamic group al-Ittihad [9], whose aim is to establish an Islamic state of Somalis in Ethiopia, Kenya, Djibouti and Somalia. The United States are convinced that Muhammad Atif, right-hand of bin Laden, was operating in the country, and a Somali Al-Qaeda terrorist cell took an active part in carrying out air attacks against its embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998.[10] The FBI‘s most wanted terrorists, Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan and Fahid Mohammed Ally Msalam, suspected of planning the 2002 Mombasa attacks and the 1998 African embassy bombings, are also hiding in the country. At the time of writing they have not been caught, so far as is publicly known.[11]

In October 2001, the US freezed the assets of Somalia‘s largest remittance and telecommunications company, al-Barakaat, on the grounds that it was part of Al Quaeda‘s financial empire.[12]

In fact, the whole region of the horn of Africa is to be seen in words of the former U.S. national security official John Prendergast as “an integrated conflict zone”[13], which makes it the more difficult to tackle the problem of terrorism there.

The flow of arms fueling the conflicts in Somalia is undoubtedly a spillover effect from the war between Ethiopia and Eritrea (who also support the rebels battling the Khartoum government in Sudan).[14]

When fighting broke out in 1998, and then again in 1999 and 2000, the flow of weapons to rival factions in Somalia increased, helping to reignite civil war there. The warlords and private militias have remained well equipped with Kalashnikovs, visibly available in local markets.[15]

Foreign affairs ministers from Kenya, Djibouti, Uganda, Ethiopia and Eritrea who met in mid-May 2004 in Nairobi, also expressed concern about „an ongoing influx of arms into Somalia“. They called on the UN to investigate this matter.“We are urging the UN Monitoring Group on the Arms Embargo in Somalia to investigate reports of the continued flow of arms into Somalia and report accordingly,”[16]

West Africa is another region which is strategically important for the United States in their war on terror.

Sierra Leone’s civil war broke out in 1991 when the rebel group the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), under the leadership of F. Sankoha, raised their arms against the governmental All People Congress. In the following years, thousands of people died, and 2 million became refugees.

In July 1999 the Lome peace agreement was signed which made Sankoh vice president, placed him in charge of a commission overseeing Sierra Leone’s diamonds, and granted amnesty to the RUF for all crimes.[17]

However, in May 2000 new fighting broke out. In April 2001 RUF leaders declared their readiness to disarm, and subsequently a new round of talks followed.[18]

Two facts should be pointed out in this case. Firstly, Liberian president Charles Taylor (who ran a regime that, according to Amnesty International, routinely imprisoned, tortured and raped its citizens), was the main supporter and arms provider to the brutal RUF and its leaders.[19]

Secondly, Sierra Leone’s diamonds played a vital role in funding the RUF. Although a diamond embargo on government exports was imposed by the UN in 1997, this prohibition was circumvented by their transport to Liberia, from where they could be easily resold.

It was only in 2001 that the US took action in this regard and, in March and then again in July 2003, imposed a prohibition (embargo) on the importation of rough diamonds from Liberia. This was done by the authority of the president of the United States, George W.Bush, due to the “role the illicit trade in diamonds played in fueling conflict and human rights violations in Sierra Leone”.[20] The UN had done so in 2001.

However, it was not only Sierra Leone’s civil war that was of concern.

In a November 2, 2001 Washington Post article, D. Farah reported that “the terrorist network led by Osma bin Laden has reaped millions of dollars in the past three years from illicit sale of diamonds mined by rebels in Sierra Leone”. [21]

Preparations for al Qaeda diamond operations began in September 1998, six weeks after the bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, when the United States had moved to freeze USD 240 million in Taliban and al Qaeda assets.

“It was at that point that al Quaeda realized where it was vulnerable in its financial structure and began to systematically move its assets to commodities.”[22] As matter of fact, diamonds are easy to transport and smuggle, and diamond transactions are hard to trace.[23]

According to Farah’s article, Charles Taylor of Liberia received a USD 1 million payment for arranging to harbour the Al-Qaeda operatives (they were also on the FBI’s Most Wanted list of terrorists), who were in the region for at least two months after the Sept. 11, 2001. The terrorists allegedly moved between Liberia and the presidential compound in neighbouring Burkina Faso. Burkina Faso’s president Blaise Campaore took an active part in the operation to protect the Al Quaeda terorrists. Interestingly, the two (Taylor and Campaore) together with Muammar Quaddafi were designated as an “African Axis” by the Washington Post in 2001.[24].

The man who served as an intermediary between Al-Qaeda diamond traders and the government of Liberia and Burkina-Fasso was Ibrahim Bah, a Senegalese who had trained in Libya, and fought in Afganistan and Lebanon. By 1998, he was also the main weapons buyer and diamond dealer for Taylor in Liberia and the RUF, further illustrating the close links between the countries I have highlighted.[25]

Given the apparent instability in the Middle East, it is in the utmost interest of the United States and the West to become less reliant on the oil sources from that region.

This idea has been explicitly expressed in the new energy strategy adopted by the Bush administration under the auspices of the president’s National Energy Policy Development Group in 2001. According to the group’s final report (so called Cheney report), the nation’s growing reliance on imported oil poses a potential threat to national security. Of particular concern is the fact of “concentration of world oil production in any one region of the world”- an obvious allusion to the Gulf region. “Therefore to meet our long-range energy needs,” Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham told the House International Relations Committee on June 20, 2002, “we must diversify our sources and types of energy.”[26]

In Cheney report, Africa’s potential role in satisfying future energy needs was given particular attention. On the basis of this report Bush administration defined African oil as a “strategic national interest”, something entirely unprecedented in the past regarding African continent. The idea was also endorsed by Assistant Secretary of State Walter Kansteiner during a visit to Nigeria in July 2002: “African oil is of strategic national interest to us, it will increase and become more important as we go forward.”[27]

The lessening of dependence on Middle East oil is also considered as a top priority issue the US should address in its war on terror together with increasing domestic preparedness against WMD attacks, limiting the proliferation of WMD and reducing enmity towards the US.[28]

Currently, the US (the biggest consumer of oil in the world) oil dependence is at nearly fifty percent of net consumption.[29] The dependence of Europe and Japan is even greater. While the United States imports around 19 million barrels of oil a day, the EU and Japan import 32.5 million barrels of oil a day.[30] Moreover, demand for energy is projected to increase by fifty percent in the next 15 years.[31]

In Februay 2004, the OPEC oil cartel cut its total output by 2,5m barrels per day (almost 10%), which in turn caused oil price to jump in response to the news. This was followed by the Madrid bombings and America’s announcement that gasoline stocks fell by

800 000 barrels, to a level 5% below their five–year average (in the first half of March).[32] This contributed to further climbing of the oil price, reaching the level of USD 41 per barrel on the 15^th of May 2004. [33] This was particularly bad news for the United States and China, whose currency is pegged to the dollar; meanwhile the appreciation of the euro and sterling against the dollar has to a certain degree compensated Europe for the rise in the oil price.

Therefore, the predictions that the combination of Iraq’s newly liberated oilfields and production by Russia -the worlds second-biggest oil exporter- would be enough to bring oil prices down, have not materialize.[34]

There are several reasons for the unstable situation in oil supplies. Iraqi production has been disrupted by sabotage in the oil fields and pipelines for months after Saddam was toppled, and it was only recently that Iraqi production started to approach its post-war target of 2,8m bpd.

Production in Venezuela was crippled in 2003 by a huge general strike aimed at unseating the president Hugo Chavez. Mr. Chavez in his turn sacked around half the state-owned oil company, which caused severe damage to oil production.[35]

The latest revelation by Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell, that it had overstated its proved reserves by 20%, has also added to the uncertainty in the oil market.[36] There are also rumours that the Saudis (the number one oil source for the US) are finding it more difficult to lift oil out of the ground.[37] The situation is further aggravated by the fragile nature of the Saudi state, which was already weak before September 11; it is now one of bin Laden’s goals to end the rule of the house of Saud[38].

In the light of all these facts it is urgent that the United States and the West look for some new energy sources. And where else to look than Africa, which is on the verge of “an unprecedented oil bonanza.” According to the Economist, a handful of states are expected to receive USD200 billion in the next decade.[39]

Currently the US 16 % of US imported crude oil come from Africa, a number which is going to rise to 20 % at least in the next decade.[40] Interestingly, the United States now imports as much oil from Africa as from Saudi Arabia and obtains more from Angola than from Kuwait. African states produce 11% of world production (8,5 million barrels a day, number which is going to raise to 16, 2 mbd by 2025).[41]

Deepwater Africa is destined to become one of the world’s most important offshore oil provinces. By 2008, for example, ChevronTexaco intends to produce 250,000 barrels per day at Nigeria’s deepwater Agbami Field.[42]

African countries already known for their oil outputs include Nigeria (OPEC member), Angola, Cameroon, Kongo/Brazaville, Kongo/Kinshasa (all of them members of African Petroleum Producers Association- APPA), Benin, Gabon and Equatorial Guinea.

Newly found drilling sites were announced in Chad (expected to make USD80mil a year from oil over next 25 years), Sudan, Equatorial Guinea and Angola (in Cabinda).

Results of recent geological surveys suggest that East Africa may soon become one of the world’s hottest oil exploration zones, with data analysed last year by Jebco Seismic, a UK-based geophysical contractor, showing major oil deposits off the coasts of Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique and Madagascar. The Kenyan coastal strip has the potential to produce about 100 million barrels of crude oil and over 600 million cubic feet of natural gas. In Uganda, three international oil companies have so far invested more than $20 million in prospecting for oil.[43]

Natural gas demand in the U.S. provides another reason why Africa is “destined to play a bigger part in [America’s] energy security”, according to the president of the ChevronTexaco. “Africa’s rapidly expanding natural gas development, and America’s rapidly expanding natural gas demand offer additional, powerful reasons to strengthen U.S. relationships with Africa.”[44]

Moreover, as shown in “US-African Trade profile” prepared by G. Feldman, 1 billion new consumers live in sub-Saharan Africa. In 2002, US exports to sub-Saharan Africa were 46 percent greater than those to the former Soviet republics (Russia included),

47 % greater than to India, and nearly twice that to Eastern Europe. Over 100,000 US jobs are tied to exports to sub-Saharan Africa, which already buys at least USD 6 billion of American products annually.[45]

Unfortunately, these oil resources and business interests are not always in very safe hands.

For instance Equatorial Guinea run by dictator Teodor Obiang has experienced several coup attempts by rival leaders. The last one was in March 2004 when 70 men were detained in Zimbabwe loading weapons en route for Equatorial Guiena.[46] The country quarrels with Nigeria over the oil rich area between the island of Bioko and the southern cost of Nigeria. Kongo/Kinshasa (Zaire), is one of the richest countries in the world regarding mineral resources, however, the disintegration of the economy under Mobutu’s regime and subsequent civil war prevent the countries full potential being reached.

Cameroon’s corrupt regime of Paul Biya (since 1982), disputes with Nigeria over the oil rich province of Bakassi claimed by both countries.

Benin is one of the poorest African countries and therefore liable to destabilization.

Sudan is destabilized by a long and deadly civil war.[47]

Unstable situation also affects oil production in Nigeria. The fighting between two local communities in trouble-some oil-rich western Niger Delta, prompted American Chevron Texaco to suspend operation in the region slashing output levels by 13% in March 2003.[48]

From all of the above facts a very important conclusion follows. The United States and the West must realize that by helping Africa, making it a more stable secure and prosperous region, they are in the first instance promoting their own interests. To secure oil supplies and to fight terrorists networks successfully, top priority importance must be attached to the issue of African development.

This view is also shared by George L. Kirkland, president of the ChevronTexaco Overseas Petroleum, who admits that it is in the vital interest of the United States “to view Africa as a region of strategic importance. To ensure continued growth and stability of the African energy supplies, U.S. government policies must be supportive of broad-based African economic development.”

Let me quote in this regard remarks by two high-level US representatives, Susane Rice, former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, and president George W.Bush.

“If we are serious about fighting terrorism, the United States must become more, rather than less, engaged in the difficult and sometimes thankless tasks of peacemaking, peacekeeping, and nation-building in failed states. We must do so not only in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also in such places as Liberia and the DRC. We can no longer afford to view any part of the world as unimportant to U.S. national security interests. Our battlefield is the globe, and we must adapt our strategies and tactics accordingly.”[49]

“Poverty” so Mr. Bush says “doesn’t cause terrorism. Being poor doesn’t make you a murderer. Most of the plotters of September 11^th were raised in comfort. Yet persistent poverty and oppression can lead to hopelessness and despair. And when governments fail to meet the most basic needs of their people, these failed states can become havens for terror.

In Afghanistan, persistent poverty and war and chaos created conditions that allowed a terrorist regime to seize power. And in many other states around the world, poverty prevents governments from controlling their borders, policing their territory, and enforcing their laws. Development provides the resources to build hope and prosperity, and security.”[50]

The remarks by president Bush perfectly fit with the reality on the African continent. “Persistent poverty and oppression” are the right words to describe the lot of the poorest part of the world. In sub-Saharan Africa half of its 700m people subsist on 65 US cents or less a day. Moreover, it is the only continent to have grown poorer in the past 25 years.[51] “Poverty prevents governments from controlling their borders, policing their territory, and enforcing their laws”. This is also very true of the African continent which is notorious for its porous and badly controlled borders. In fact it is one of the reasons why various arms embargos on the African states or warring parties has been mostly unsuccessful and it is also the reason why the proliferation of small arms in Africa is so difficult to handle. According to the estimates there are over 100 million small arms and light weapons [52] circulating in Africa, which are major drivers of armed conflicts in the region. In fact, the high number of high intensity conflicts is one of the most serious issues of the African continent. There were seven of them annually from 1990 to 2000. Nowhere else in the world has there been such a high concentration of intensive conflict since the end of the Second World War.[53]

However, well aware of the need for increased financial aid for the poor and weak countries, Mr. Bush also points out the importance of preconditions for such aid.

“The evidence shows that where nations adopt sound policies, a dollar of foreign aid attracts USD 2 of private investment”.[54]

This leads us to the final argument i.e. mutual dependence of the ideas of good governance, foreign aid and foreign direct investments (FDI) as major drivers of African development.

The main reason the continent is so poor today is, as acknowledged by many academics, that Mugabe-style incompetent tyranny has been common in Africa since independence. Only one African country, Botswana has been consistently well governed since independence. And it is no coincidence that Botswana’s GDP per capita is one of the highest in Africa (USD 2450 in 1992, the same in 1997 and USD 3420 in 1999).[55]

On the other hand a country such as Zimbabwe is a good example of what happens when the rulers despise property rights and the laws of their own country. Zimbabwe is on the verge of economic collapse and possibly civil war.

It is also true that the trend seems to be shifting towards a “brighter future”. In the 1960s and 1970s no African ruler was voted out of office. In the 1980s, one was. Since then, 18 have been. Since 1990 42 of the 48 countries in sub-Saharan Africa have held multi-party elections[56]

We can take it as a sign that some African governments are becoming more accountable to their people, though rigged polls and prosecution of dissidents are still high on their agendas.

So as we see, Africa has grown more democratic since the end of the cold war which is a good sign. However, the nature of this “African democracy” is very fragile indeed and far from functioning as western style democracies; the situation further aggravated by numerous conflicts in the region. The real test is therefore whether these democratic governments will establish themselves as stable and modern style democracies and whether they will be able to “lay the foundations for economic growth.”[57]

According to the conclusions by the authors of the study paper “A Ten-Year Strategy for Increasing Capital Flows to Africa”, Africa’s development objectives will not be achieved unless significant amount of capital (especially FDI) starts to flow to the continent.[58] Currently, however Africa attracts less than 1 percent of global capital flows and accounts for less than 1 percent of world trade.[59] Also alarming is the fact that not even Africans want to invest in Africa: an estimated 40% of the continent’s privately held wealth is stashed offshore.[60]

What Africa needs, to make foreign aid and FDI work is responsible democratic “leaders who can uphold the law in their country impartially, pass feasible budgets and stick to it.”[61] “The most important ingredients for a strong investment environment include political freedom,…reliable legal frameworks, …no corruption … and transparency.”[62]

This idea has also been endorsed by the G-8 group of countries during its June 2002 summit in Kananaskis, where it agreed to provide by 2006 an additional USD 6 billion annually to African countries undertaking significant economic and institutional reforms.

The same approach is implemented in the US 2002-03 Millenium Challenge Account, where the sum of USD 5 billion is to be provided to the countries that the administration determines are “ruling justly, investing in their people, and establishing economic freedom.”[63]

Kenya is a good example of what happens when an undemocratic, authoritarian government is replaced by one dedicated to the idea of good (or at least better) governance.

Since 1997 the IMF had frozen lending to the corrupt regime of Daniel arap Moi. Other donors followed suit, leading to a considerable downturn of the country’s economy. In December 2002 Mr. Kibaki took over the presidential post, pushing through legislation to form an anti-corruption commission and to purge the judiciary.

In November 2003, the IMF resumed its lending to Kenya after 6 years of abstention![64]

On the examples of Somalia and countries in West Africa we showed the activities of Al-Qaeda on the African continent. In the case of Somalia, the terrorist group can freely operate on the country’s territory because of the chaos and power vaccum which exists in the counry.

In the cases of Liberia, Burkina-Fasso and Sierra Leone, Al-Qaeda operators could pursue their financial interests whilst being fully supported by the country’s highest officials.

So as long as the current situation remains unchallenged, the effort to pursue a successful war on terror will be seriously undermined.

We explained the situation on the oil market pointing out growing uncertainty regarding oil resources availability.

We highlighted in this respect the importance of the African continent whose energy sources will play an important role in the future.

To appropriately address the problem of international terrorist networks operating in Africa and to ensure secure access to African energy resources, we drew attention to the problem of African development and stabilization. This is the crucial issue and must be dealt with, with the utmost urgency.

In the final paragraph we pointed out the correlation between foreign aid/foreign direct investments and the idea of good governence. To succesfully solve the problems of African development for which foreign investments are a prerequisite, a suitable political framework must be provided. We showed an apparent trend towards democratization in process on the continent, which, however, doesn’t reach a satisfactory level.

As a last remark I would again like to stress the idea which is the leitmotiv of the paper, that solving African problems doesn’t serve only African interests but promotes the highest strategic and economic interests of the United States and the West.

[1] Rice, E.,S., U.S.National Security Policy Post-9/11: Perils and Prospects, vol.28:1 Winter 2004 p.141 at: www.brook.edu/index/papersarticles.htm

[2] The Economist, Mar 18^th 2004, The fog and dogs of war, www.economist.com

[3] State sponsors of terrorism are countries designated by the Secretary of State under Section 6 of the Export Administration Act of 1979 as countries that have “repeatedly provided state support for acts of international terrorism”. Currently the list includes apart from Sudan also Cuba, Iraq, Libya, North Korea and Syria.

[4] Title 31 Part 538 of the U.S. Code of Federal regulations, U.S. Department of the Treasury-Office of Foreign Assets Control, at: www.treas.gov/ofac

[5] Lindley, D.A. The campaign against terrorism, Kroc Institute Occasional Paper 22:OP:1, April 2002, p.24, http://www3.nd.edu/%7Ekrocinst/research/econsanc-pub.html#policy

[6] Hufbauer, G.,C, Schott, J.J., Oegg, B., Using Sanctions to Fight Terrorism, Policy Brief 01-11 of the Institute for International Economics, p.6, at: www.iie.com/publications/pb/pb01-11.htm

[7] Ibid, p.6

[8] Lexikon zemi, Fortuna Print, Praha, 2002, p. 391

[9] Hufbauer, G.,C, Schott, J.J., Oegg, B., Using Sanctions to Fight Terrorism, Policy Brief 01- the Institute 11 of for International Economics, p.6, at: www.iie.com/publications/pb/pb01-11.htm

[10] Lexikon zemi, Fortuna Print, Praha, 2002, p. 391

[11] http://africapundit.blogspot.com/2003_03_16_africapundit_archive.html

[12]Somalia: In the Crosshairs of the War on Terrorism, Ken Menkhaus, in: Current History, March 2004, published by Current History Inc., Philadelphia, USA, p.214

[13] Cortright, D., Lopez, G.A., Sanctions Sans Commitment: An Assessment of UN Arms Embargoes, p.7., www.forthfreedom.org/pdf/ArmsEmbargoes.pdf)

[14] Ibid, p.7

[15] Ibid, p.4

[16] Joyce Mulama, Kenya, ‚Pain in the neck‘ leaders, at: http://www.mg.co.za/Content/l3.asp?ao=66353

[17] Barone, M., Dirty Diamonds, Web exclusive, at: www.Usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_011112.htm

[18] Lexikon zemi, Fortuna Print, Praha, 2002, p.382

[19] These in their turn built their army by “systematically kidnapping children, forcing them to murder their parents, hacked off the limbs of the prisoners and raped the children”. Barone, M., Dirty Diamonds, Web exclusive, at: www.Usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_011112.htm

[20] Executive orders, July 2003, March 2001, U.S. Department of the Treasury-Office of Foreign Assets Control, at www.treas.gov/ofac

[21] Barone, M., Dirty Diamonds, Web exclusive, at: www.Usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_011112.htm

[22] in: Farah, D., Washington Post Staff Writer, Sunday December 29, 2002; page A01

[23] Barone, M., Dirty Diamonds, Web exclusive, at: www.Usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_011112.htm

[24] www.africapundit.blogspot.com/2003_02_23_africapundit_archive.html]

[25] Farah’s article is based on a copy of military intelligence summary, which draws on interviews with senior investigators, the intelligence report and documents obtained independently that verify its findings

[26] Africa‘s Oil and American National Security, Michael T. Klare and Daniel Volman, in: Current History, March 2004, published by Current History Inc., Philadelphia, USA, p.227

[27] ibid, p. 227

[28] See also: Lindley, D.A., The campaign against terrorism, p.25

[29] Energy Information Administration information at: www.Eia.doe.gov/emeu/25opec/sld002.htm

[30] Anthony Cordesman, “energy Policy and Energy Analysis: Flawed Analysis Means Flawed Policy,” Center for Strategic and Internationa Studies, May 3, 2001 at www.csis.org/burke/mees/energypolicy_analysis.pdf

[31] Lindley, D.A, p.22

[32] The Economist Mar 18^th 2004, Painful for some, but hardly a crisis, www.economist.com.

[33] RFI radio news, 15^th of May 2004, 10a.m.

[34] The Economist, Feb 11^th 2004, Let’s see them stick to this one, www.economist.com

[35] Ibid

[36] Reserves are a crucial asset for oil and gas companies, indicating the level of future production and revenues, The Economist, Mar 10^th 2004, Shellshocked, www.economist.com

[37] The Economist, Feb 11^th 2004, Let’s see them stick to this one, www.economist.com

[38] Lindley, p.20

[39] The Economist, Dec 4^th 2003, Can oil ever help the poor?, www.economist.com

[40] Ten-Years Strategy for Increasing Capital Flows to Africa, Commission on Capital Flows to Africa, June 2003, p.12, at www. http://www.iie.com/research/africa-mideast.htm

[41] Africa‘s Oil and American National Security, Michael T. Klare and Daniel Volman, in: Current History, March 2004, published by Current History Inc., Philadelphia, USA, p.226

[42] Remarks by George L. Kirkland, president ChevronTexaco Overseas Petroleum at the American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C. April 13, 2004, to be found at: http://allafrica.com/stories/200404270856.html

[43] Data for newly found east-Africa oil resources quoted from: Kevin J. Kelley, AllAfrica Special Correspondent, New Surveys Show East Africa May Have Huge Oil Deposits, at: http://allafrica.com/stories/200405130061.html and The Economist, Dec 4^th 2003, Can oil ever help the poor

[44] US gas demand is expected to increase nearly 50 percent by 2020, while traditional North American supply sources will be able to meet only 75 percent of the nation’s long-term needs, Remarks by George L. Kirkland, president ChevronTexaco Overseas Petroleum at the American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C. April 13, 2004, to be found at: http://allafrica.com/stories/200404270856.html

[45] “US-African Trade profile prepared by G. Feldman, Office of Africa, International Trade administration, US Dep. of Commerce, Washington, DC, March 2003, in Ten-Years Strategy for Increasing Capital Flows to Africa, Commission on Capital Flows to Africa, June 2003, p.12, at http://www.iie.com/research/africa-mideast.htm

[46] The fog and dogs of war, The Economist, www.economist.com

[47] Lexikon, Fortuna Print, Praha, 2002

[48] BBC News, 3/22 2003 at www.newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2872537.stm

[49] Rice, E.,S., U.S.National Security Policy Post-9/11: Perils and Prospects, vol.28:1 Winter 2004 p.141 at: www.brook.edu/index/papersarticles.htm

[50] quote taken from: “President Proposes USD 5 Billion Plan to Help Developing Nations” Remarks by the President on Global Development, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, D.C., at: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020314/7html, to be found also in: Lindley, D., A., The Campaign Against Terrorism, Kroc institute Occasional Paper 22:OP:1, April 2002

[51] The Economist, Jan 15^th 2004, First get the basics right, www.economist.com

[52] i.e. assault rifles hand grenades, rocket launchers, landmines and explosives, in: Atanga, L.M., Tackling Small Arms in Central Africa, published by BICC, Bonn 2003, p13, also at www.bicc.de

[53] Atanga, L.M., Tackling Small Arms in Central Africa, published by BICC, Bonn 2003, p. 5 and 7, also at www.bicc.de

[54] “President Proposes USD 5 Billion Plan to Help Developing Nations” Remarks by the President on Global Development, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, D.C., at: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020314/7html, to be found also in: Lindley, D., A., The Campaign Against Terrorism, Kroc institute Occasional Paper 22:OP:1, April 2002

[55] Lexikon, Fortuna Print, Praha, 2002

[56] for statistics in this paragraph, see: the Economist, Jan 15^th 2004 and Ten-Year Strategy for …,p. 11

[57] The Economist, Jan 15^th 2004, First get the basics right

[58] It has been established that there is a correlation between foreign direct investment flows and economic growth, especially when there is an educated work force and hospitable conditions for investment. The experience of Hong Kong, Singapore Ireland, Mauritius, China, and Costa Rica suggests that if there is a positive evironment, FDI will flow and contribute to sustained growth. In: Moran, T., “Attracting Non-Extractive Investment to Africa: Challenges, Success Stories, and Lessons for the Future.” Institute for International Economics Discussion paper for the Corporate Council on Africa, October 17, quote to be found in: Ten-Year Strategy…, p.13

[59] A Ten Years strategy…, p.5

[60] The Economist, Jan 15^th 2004, First get the basics right

[61] The Economist, Jan 15 2004, Making Africa Smile

[62] A Ten Years strategy…, p.15

[63] A Ten Years strategy…, p.13, 19.

This approache, however has been newly challenged by America’s new strategic imperatives in other parts of the world. That is to say, providing financial support for the countries not on the above mentioned basis, but on the basis of the strategic importance of the country in the ongoing war on terror. This is well illustrated by the considerable increase in the foreign aid for countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. All of them can hardly be described as well-governed countries. Yet, OECD aid for them increased from USD 1 billion in 2000 to USD 3,7 billion in 2002. In 2003 the Bush administration sought another USD 3 billion for Pakistan, whose foreign debts were approaching 55% of GDP in the summer of 2001 and its reserves stand now at USD 11 billion (!). Statistics used in this paragraph are quoted from The Economist, Apr 23^rd 2004, The best use of aid?.

[64] see article in The Economist, Nov 27^th2003, Dirt out, cash in