Summit of the despots taking place in what used to be the smiling coast of west Africa (the Gambia) is going smoothly except for a few malapropos here and there. Case in point is Libya's Ghaddafi. He proposed the perennial cry of Pan Africanist ...the uniting of African states as reported by the point in this story:
However Mr. Ghaddafi didn't find it important to attend the opening session of the summit he is purportedly in Banjul to attend. Angolapress reports that:
How do you expect people to respect and debate your proposal if you refused to be in the same room with them. The Libyan delegation is covering for their quintessential dictator by saying that his absence is a protest against a "possible" decision to withdraw African troops from Sudan. Personally I believe that would be catastrophic on the part of the AU unless the United Nations decides to take over their mission. However the operative word here is "possible". The decision hasn't been made. Ghaddafi will serve his position well if he sticks around and argue his point. Walking out in protest from a room full of despots will not help you much especially if the issue you are protesting over is still under review and open to debate. No?
Not to be left out of the charade and never one to pass out a chance to lashed out at the west and the united states for that matter, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Iran's Ahmadinejad were at their demagogic best in this anglopress piece.
The 7th Edition of the Banjul AU Summit is expected to discuss, among other things, the creation of a United States of Africaproposed by Libyan Leader Muammar El Gaddafi.
However Mr. Ghaddafi didn't find it important to attend the opening session of the summit he is purportedly in Banjul to attend. Angolapress reports that:
Libyan leader, Col. Moammar Kadhafi was absent from the hall at the opening session of the 7th African Union (AU) summit of heads of states and governments, which began in Banjul Saturday, it was observed by PANA correspondents in Banjul.
How do you expect people to respect and debate your proposal if you refused to be in the same room with them. The Libyan delegation is covering for their quintessential dictator by saying that his absence is a protest against a "possible" decision to withdraw African troops from Sudan. Personally I believe that would be catastrophic on the part of the AU unless the United Nations decides to take over their mission. However the operative word here is "possible". The decision hasn't been made. Ghaddafi will serve his position well if he sticks around and argue his point. Walking out in protest from a room full of despots will not help you much especially if the issue you are protesting over is still under review and open to debate. No?
Not to be left out of the charade and never one to pass out a chance to lashed out at the west and the united states for that matter, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Iran's Ahmadinejad were at their demagogic best in this anglopress piece.
5 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Here is an interesting article that shows why the Bush Clan doesn't like Chavez.
http://www.veninfo.org/news/07-06pro.html
"Long live Arabia and long live Iran in freedom and equality," Chavez said, stealing a glance at Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who is also attending the summit.
When Chavez made the following statement, I think he was taking a jab at the Iranian President. Chavez is aware that the House of Saud financially supported Saddam's war with Iran. He's also aware that it is Saudi Arabia who is controlling or limiting the amount of money Iran can make from its oil reserve.
I have to say, I love Chavez's humor.
He criticize bush and the west, but squash any kind of dissent in his own backyard.
I think that Senegal's President Wade recently declared NEPAD is not working (BBC News), NEPAD having not built even a single road in sub-Saharan Africa since the inception of the program. That's pretty heavy coming from one of the original founders of NEPAD and a defacto key national leader in Africa today. Of course, the G8 Summit of 2005 and the subsequent debt relief to some heavily-indebted African countries could be seen as a triumph for NEPAD and the AU, oder?
The fact that Iran's lunatic President Ahmadinejad was at the AU Summit espousing his special brand of garbage about the injustice of the slave trade vs. the holocaust legacy in Europe was for me as a descendent of African slaves VERY DISTURBING. Then to have Hugo (The Bull) Chavez of Venezuela at the AU Summit as well bantering his anti-American rhetoric to a rapt audience of Africa's leaders was just as ominous. The only fool missing was Kim Jong Il of North Korea.
Who invited all of these guys to the AU Summit in Banjul, and what does their presence at the Summit say about the future of Africa and particularly about the future of sub-Saharan Africa's relationships with Western democracies?
Muammar Ghaddafi (The Colonel) of Libya probably didn't want to attend the AU Summit in Banjul due to pressing business engagements with new European and American investors. Since when has Ghaddafi been interested in the welfare of black Africans (ref: Darfur, Chad, Liberia, Sierra Leone, etc.)?