South African Government (Pretoria)
30 August 2007
document
Cape Town — Comments on the proposed Africa Command of the United States Defense Department, extracted from the official transcript of a briefing on defence and foreign affairs given by South African ministers at Parliament in Cape Town on August 29. Questions from journalists were answered by defence minister Mosiuoa Lekota.
A more recent issue has been that of the United States' Africa Command (AFRICOM). This is not a new development in so far as the United States has always had some presence on the African continent.
The AFRICOM initiative has raised a lot of interest and attracted a lot of attention because at some point there is a sense that Africa has to avoid the presence of foreign forces on her soil. There is a certain sense that if there was to be an influx of armed forces into one or another African countries, this might affect the relations between sister countries and not encourage an atmosphere and sense of security. The idea of a U.S. focus on Africa is not new.
The SADC Summit did adopt the position that it is better if the United States were involved with Africa from a distance rather than be present on the continent that creates a sense of uncertainty.
Minister Lekota, could you elaborate on the AFRICOM – has this been communicated to the United States and by whom?
With regard to this matter, let me say that at the SADC Inter-State Committee meeting in Dar-es-Salaam, the SADC Defence and Security Ministers took a decision that sister countries of the region should not agree to host AFRICOM and in particular, armed forces, since this would have a negative effect. That recommendation was presented to the Heads of State and this is a SADC position.
As far as we are aware, the majority of the regions in Africa have taken a similar position. The decisions and outcomes of the Continental body would be communicated to the relevant parties by the African Union administration in Addis Ababa.
Minister Lekota, is there not a risk in knowing that there will be carrier and troops in the Gulf of Guinea and in the Horn of Africa without being able to do anything about it?
It is not unnatural that there may be one or two countries who do not concur with the majority. In fact, this is the nature of democracy – ie. majorities and not unanimity. So, if one was to say that this is an African position, this would be so because this is the position of the majority. Normally the minority, even if it holds a different view, would support the view of the majority simply because the interest of the unity of Africa supercedes one's personal view.
I would imagine that any country that wants to go against the decision of the African Union does not having taken full cognizance of the implications of this decision. South Africa takes a position that even if we do hold a different view, we would support the view of the majority of the continent simply because this is in our medium to long-term interests.
Minister Lekota, SADC took a position on AFRICOM and this was presented in Addis Ababa. Is there an African Union position on this matter?
My understanding is that this is a continental position. We have no quarrel with AFRICOM as such, but the issue of its location in Africa is of concern. The continent has said that it would not like to see new forces in Africa.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2007 South African Government. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
