Windhoe — Angola enjoys peace after decades of civil war (1975-2002), but what were the real root causes of the Angolan civil conflict, and what role did the Americans play ?

If there is any country that received negative reports and biased international media attention in Southern Africa, it is Angola and its MPLA led government. The international media coverage of the Angolan civil war was severely biased toward Unita and ignored almost all the positive developments by the MPLA government.

On the other hand, language barriers served in the best interest of those with intent to paint a negative picture of the MPLA government and have indeed managed to mislead a lot of people in Southern Africa, by sticking a label that belongs to Jonas Savimbi's Unita to the MPLA, by providing selective negative reports about the Angolan President Jose Eduardo dos Santos. But Mr Dos Santos proved himself to be the right leader Angola needed during her troubled times, honest and serious about peace in his country and of late has turned out to be one of the prominent African statesman, a true visionary and an icon of pacification.

This article presents a brief analytical history of political developments in Angola during the cold war, and is not about who preaches what or who believed in what acceptable or un-acceptable ideologies, or belonged on what side of the cold war, but of the truth and true reality about political events in Angola and about behaviors of the main actors during the struggle for the liberation of Angola, and why they adopted such pattern of behavior. I mean the root cause of the Angolan trouble, the civil war.

The main focus of this article is the root cause of the Angolan civil conflict, following the signature of the ceasefire agreement between the MPLA and the Portuguese colonial army in 1974.

The content of this opinion piece is derived from the use of assumptions and deductive reasoning and is based on the actions and behaviors undertaken by both sides during the struggle for the liberation of Angola. It (the article) places more emphasis on the global contexts under which most of the political events in Angola took place. It is also worth noting the fact that one cannot understand the Angolan conflict in isolation from relevant global political events.

The reality is that Angolans never shared a long period of peace in their country, since time immemorial and nobody knows if the current peace is there to stay or just momentary.

Advent of Europeans

Angolans lived a pre-colonial feudal life marked by inter-tribal wars, then observed the advent of Europeans, mainly Portuguese with whom they engaged in anti-colonial wars of resistance. Third they lived under Portuguese colonial rule for almost over 500 years and launched a liberation struggle for national independence in the 1950s, spearheaded by the MPLA, and gained independence in 1975, following the signature of the ceasefire agreement between the MPLA forces and the Portuguese colonial army.

The struggle for the liberation of Angola coincided with a coup d'état in Portugal, that overthrew M. Caetano's dictatorship in 1974, and the new Portuguese authority signed a peace deal with the MPLA, ending almost two decades of the liberation struggle.

However, some other toothless liberation movements on the periphery vied for the national political leadership and depended on the outside world for help in making deals with the MPLA, not to declare independence and establish socialism in Angola, but to form an interim government pending preparation for democratic elections. But the MPLA under the leadership of Dr Antonio Augustinho Neto was opposed to such idea of forming an interim government with Unita's Jonas Savimbi and the FNLA of Holden Roberto, given previous disagreements with FNLA during the struggle for liberation on the future of the country.

Dr Antonio Neto and his MPLA had a fair share of disputes with the tribal FNLA about its dealings with the Americans in an attempt to weaken the MPLA. The dispute was not about FNLA's opposition to the struggle for liberation, but on fundamental differences, which ranged from the reasons for the formation of FNLA, which borders on tribalism, competition for leadership of the yet to be liberated Angola and ideological differences on the future of the Angolan state.

The dispute between the MPLA and FNLA got worse due to the latter's failure to withstand American influence, aimed at securing western interest in Angola from Soviet influence, through turning around Angolan leaders of the divided liberation movements.

During the struggle for the liberation of Angola, the MPLA leadership saw no difference between Portugal and the rest of western capitalist states and obtained financial, military, material and moral support from communist Soviet Union, to liberate Angolans from Portuguese colonialism.

The MPLA leadership was nationalistic, independent minded and proved hard to work with and convince for that matter, and it chose to introduce and implement a communist economic system and socialism ideology in Angola.

The certainty about the introduction of a communist economic system in Angola by the MPLA was seen as a western loss in terms of spheres of influence and economic stakes in a resource-rich south-western African Portuguese colony. This fact alone kept western diplomats in Southern Africa, especially the Americans, busy to prevent such eventuality of communism in Angola.

The USA, though opposed to the overthrow of white minority regimes in Southern Africa, by black African liberations movements (communists), who could only ally themselves to communist Russia in order to get military support to fight for their liberation, could not do anything but to fight for influence in the affairs of post-independent African states and use their political leaders to support the capitalist cause.

Therefore, the CIA and American ambassadors to Africa and Southern Africa in particular, were busy working hard to secure deals with the Angolans in order to create a formidable opposition movement before independence as an alternative to the communist MPLA.

So, the disputes and disagreements between the oldest Angolan liberation movement MPLA and FNLA presented itself as a present to the Americans, who for too long yearned for the creation of more than one liberation movement in Angola, just to create the pre-conditions for a post-liberation struggle power contest in Angola.

The Americans realized long time before independence that with the MPLA as the sole Angolan liberation movement, Angola was for sure gone to communism, and attempts were made to salvage Angola from Soviet and Cuban influence, just before the defeat of the Portuguese colonial army by the MPLA guerillas.

Angola Salvation

The whole project "Angola salvation" started with the turn-around of the FNLA leadership, and Holden Roberto became the first Angolan CIA big catch, but unfortunately his FNLA was a tribal party and did not enjoy the support of the majority Angolan urban dwellers as opposed to the MPLA, and the Americans realized that the whole love affair with FNLA would not result in a natal capitalistic liberal democratic Angola, but into a postal-natal wind, while real Angola would be a Marxist-Leninist state, under leadership of the popular MPLA.

Then, they (Americans) resorted to tribal and ethnic manipulations of Angolans in order to map out something better to achieve their objectives of a friendly regime in Angola. After scanning the Angolan society, they (Americans) identified that the majority tribe or ethnic group in Angola were the Ovimbundus of the central Angolan highland.

To the Americans this people held the potential to determine the future outcome of the Angolan state, if opportunity for democratic elections they sought availed itself in Angola. So attempts were made to create a fake liberation movement spearheaded by an individual from the Ovimbundu ethnic group, just in the name of safeguarding western economic interests and to counter communist influence in Southern Africa. The project had nothing to do with the genuine economic and political independence of Angola as a black nation, but to serve and protect the Americans' geopolitical interests.

So, while the MPLA was fighting to liberate Angola from Portuguese colonialism with Soviet assistance, the Americans were busy in and out of Angola shuttling between liberation movements and individual Angolans making deals first with Holden Roberto of the FNLA.

After observing the obvious failure with the FNLA alliance, they turned to ethnicity in Angola to immediately handpick and recruit a black Angolan from the majority ethnic group as a western political ally (agent) and make deals with that individual by promising him assistance to set him up and mobilize Angolans pretending to be fighting against Portuguese colonial rule in Angola - in actual fact to save Angola from communist threats (influence) presented by the MPLA, the true Angolan liberation movement, and to protect western interests in Angola.

So, the vicious, highly aggressive, ambitious and charismatic Jonas Malheiro Savimbi from the majority Ovimbundu ethnic group in Angola came forward and presented himself as the second CIA big catch, and the deal was made.

Savimbi was made out to be an aspirant to the Angolan presidency, lectured on a sure success due to the advantage he got over all other liberation movements. is majority ethnic group, the Ovimbundu of the central Angolan highlands, was his political capital and theoretical support base.

UNITA

So, Jonas Savimbi was set to start his own political project code named UNITA, and the letters T&I for total independence exposed and reflected the fundamental basis of the SAVIMBI-CIA DEAL.

Unita was not created to fight Portuguese colonialism in Angola, but was a pre-emptive creation to fight against the advent of communism in Angola, therefore to counter the MPLA (communists) on behalf of the Americans.

The whole scheme was well planned, so once the MPLA had liberated Angola, Unita was supposed to make a big noise telling the MPLA that, hey you guys don't think that you were the only ones who liberated the country from Portuguese colonialism.

Therefore, the MPLA got to listen to Unita as third Angolan liberation movement and to Savimbi's demand for elections, for the Angolans to choose who will lead the country. Savimbi would be confident and the Americans would be sure of the outcome of their genius plot to manipulate Angolans, by replacing one liberation movement they didn't like with the other, using Angolans in the process.

The Americans plotted in partnership with these fanatics, power hungry and greedy Angolans with intent to rob the MPLA and Angolan people of their true independence and substitute it with a less independent pro-western government, just in the name of protecting western economic interests in Angola.

This had upset Dr Antonio Augustinho Neto and led him to ignore the American proposal for an interim government to be constituted by the so-called all Angolan liberation movements, pending democratic elections.

To Dr Antonio Neto and his MPLA party, the whole issue of an interim government was not an Angolan liberation project, nor did contesting for Angolan leadership with leaders of a fake liberation movementssuch as Unita, ever form part of the MPLA's liberation agenda.

Dr Antonio Neto viewed Jonas Savimbi as an ambitious power hungry Angolan, who became a western pawn, and indeed a puppet, just to achieve what he wanted (Angolan presidency).

Dr Antonio Neto viewed Savimbi as an Angolan who became a victim of foreign manipulations to ensure the continuation of the colonial project, in new version neo-colonialism or governments by friends around the world, the outcome of which would be dependent governments, just to maintain the status quo as far as economic benefits are concerned.

Despite that, the deal was done, Jonas Savimbi was identified as a potential American partner from the major Angolan ethnic group and Washington was assured of a good partnership with a potential to yield positive results for western economic interests, if democratic elections were to be held in Angola one day.

Help of the CIA

So, the reality is that Unita was formed well in advance before the defeat of the Portuguese and before independence with the help of the CIA, which assured Savimbi its support to form it up as a liberation movement, not to fight, but to wait in the background, and the deals were made by Unita and the Portuguese intelligence community and security forces not to crush him, but for Savimbi to act as a paid informer on the movements of the MPLA freedom fighters.

The true aim for the creation of Unita was a bit distant, to force the liberating MPLA to abandon its socialism agenda by demanding to have a say in the future administration of the country, as a third liberation movement or opposition, by no other means, but via democratic elections, that is what the Americans wanted to see happening in Angola after the defeat of the Portuguese by the MPLA - not outright imposition of communism on the Angolan society.

As part of misleading Angolans, Unita was to pretend as freedom fighters and got to produce fake skirmishes and tales of real battlefield experience with the Portuguese colonial forces. So instead of fighting face to face with the colonialists as the MPLA did, Unita

was producing war fiction to be seen as real in the eyes of innocent Angolans to earn their support and sympathy for it to have the grounds to pressure the liberating MPLA, for it to have a say in the administration of post-independent Angola and Savimbi was sure that he would be the first Angolan president once the MPLA agreed to elections, because he was seated on treachery, the support of the Ovimbundu, his ethnic group.

To the Americans, the presence of Unita and FNLA in Angola as allies meant the communist MPLA would be forced to abandon their socialist agenda and give in to demands for a capitalist liberal democracy these other fake and tribal liberation movements would demand, and this would be in the best interests of the western capitalist world.

The plot seemed to have been conceived well in advance and the Angolan people had no idea about its content. What they (Angolans) knew about was Unita and Dr Jonas Savimbi as a freedom fighter, so they lent him their support and so many people in the south and the centre of the country, including some foreign liberation movements, allied themselves with Unita as a fellow African liberation movement. So it was too late when they discovered that Unita was a fake liberation movement, just as fake as Savimbi's PhD in Law and Political Science he claimed to have obtained from Lausanne University, Switzerland. The guy was a college dropout, never graduated with a PhD.

All of his (Savimbi) were scams and he was a misfortune and a curse to the Angolan nation just like Phil ya Nangolo is a curse to Namibians.

So the CIA used all the opportunities available to manipulate the political situation in Angola into their favour with valid reasons to secure their geopolitical interests in Angola and tried to mould the FNLA into a formidable liberation movement to counter the MPLA, by insisting upon the holding of elections immediately after the defeat of the Portuguese and before formal proclamation of independence, to give Angolans a chance to make a choice for their future, rather than the outright imposition of communism on the Angolan society by the MPLA.

Foreign Crooks

When the FNLA failed Jonas Savimbi was identified and his ethnic group was used as his political capital, and many people in southern Angola joined Unita, rather than the genuine Angolan liberation movement the MPLA, which was operating in the far north of the country.

All these foreign motivated fixes and crooks were done to counter the spread of communism and to protect western economic interest in Angola.

The Americans saw the MPLA as a threat and indeed felt threatened and tried by all means to block the western loss of Angola to communism. It was the MPLA that kept the Americans busy on the outcome of the future of the Angolan state, while on the other hand the MPLA saw the Americans as imperialists bent on legitimating the re-colonization of Angola through Angolans such as the FNLA and Unita.

So, one should not blame the MPLA, the genuine Angolan liberation movement, for introducing socialism and a communist economic system in Angola, it had no alternative but to engage with the Soviet Union and Cuba in order to secure military support for the liberation struggle, and then to guard the independence of Angola from foreign aggression.

Dr Antonio Neto had a good understanding of the reasons behind the formation of Unita during the struggle for the liberation of Angola and was well aware of Savimbi's crooks and tribalism, especially his hatred of Angolans of mixed-race, and went head with his programme for unilateral declaration of Angolan independence without giving consideration to either party.

Dr Antonio Neto dismissed Unita and the FNLA on the basis that they were tribal and ethnic fanatics and not genuine freedom fighters, but were formed with foreign influence to counter the MPLA, and were more interested in taking over the national leadership of the country, which they did not deserve as far as the struggle for the liberation of Angola was concerned.

Dr Antonio Neto viewed Unita and the FNLA as foreign creations ridden with outside influence in a bid to rob the MPLA and the Angolan people of their genuine independence. He saw them as stooges and fronts of imperialism serving foreign interests rather than the interests of the Angolan people.

His (Neto) analysis and understanding was based on experience and on western attempts to turn him around to avoid the introduction of socialism in Angola, and upon failure to win him over they consulted the FNLA's Holden Roberto to make deals, but the FNLA was weak in terms of support base and then Unita was formed with the arrogant Savimbi as a quick fix to save Angola from its liberators, the communist MPLA.

Upon the signature of the ceasefire agreement with the Portuguese colonial Army, Dr Antonio Neto listened to the American talks and proposals for an interim government with Unita and FNLA, before elections to be held for Angolans to be given a chance to choose their leaders and for the establishment of a capitalist liberal democratic state instead of a Socialist/Marxist-Leninist state.

Dr Antonio Neto and his MPLA dismissed the idea and ignored plans for the interim government and decided to push those (Unita & FNLA) to the margins and went ahead with the declaration of Angolan independence on November 11, 1975.

Not Real Liberators

To him (Neto) they (Unita & FNLA) were not real liberators, but opportunists and free riders and decided to ignore all those talks and went ahead with the preparation for unilateral declaration of victory and independence of Angola on November 11, 1975.

It was on this day of independence that Dr Antonio Neto was informed of the foreign army marching across the country from the south, east and north towards the capital city Luanda to partake in the independence celebrations not as invited guests, but as a mob to spoil the party by storming and disruptions.

This marked the first western attempt on Luanda (the South African invasion of Angola in 1975), in concert with the CIA, Unita and FNLA forces.

The objective was to storm Luanda, disrupt the independence celebrations and perhaps destroy the entire MPLA leadership and install in power Jonas Savimbi as president and Holden Roberto as the premier, just to save Angola from communist influence and to safeguard western interests.

The MPLA, the genuine Angolan liberation movement, found itself being fought by the alliance of Angolans, racist South Africans and the CIA, in an attempt to rob it (MPLA) with thieves storming Luanda in daylight to prevent Dr Antonio Neto from declaring victory and national independence from Portugal alone.

This 1975 South African invasion of Angola on Unita and the FNLA's side prompted the MPLA to seek foreign assistance in the fight against foreign aggression, and get support from Cuba and the Soviet Union.

While the MPLA forces were engaged with the invading allied forces at

Quifagondo River, less than ten kilometres east of Luanda, Neto was busy declaring the independence of Angola in the capital city, under the sound of guns.

Two days later the Cuban forces landed on the Angolan coast to lend their military assistance to the MPLA, and after three months of fierce fighting involving Cuban troops, the South Africans were defeated, the alliance dispersed and Angola remained independent.

The FNLA retreated to northern Angola and Savimbi vanished into the Angolan jungle to launch his long march to the Angolan presidency which turned into a violent drive to his own death.

So, Angola was never occupied by any other foreign forces than the Portuguese, and neither was Angola colonized by the racist mixed races as Savimbi used to claim, and the MPLA was and is still a multi-racial party and the people who hold high posts in the MPLA, and the government were and are still pure black Angolans from all ethnic groups.

So, Dr Antonio Neto was a visionary Angolan leader, who handpicked Mr Jose Eduardo Dos Santos to follow him to lead Angola through its troubled times in his absence and Mr Dos Santos managed to deliver Angola from trouble to peace and prosperity.

However, Mr Dos Santos faltered on two important items - the failure to curb official corruption and looting of state property at the expense of the masses and by allowing the national police and army to be heavy handed and behave like lions among the civilian population they claim to protect.

So, beating and harassing people to make baseless payment is robbery of Angolan civilians by men in state uniform and it is not patriotism, but absurdity to the highest degree and does not serve in the best interests of the ruling MPLA in the world of democratic elections.

Neto's prophetic words

Mr Dos Santos also failed to heed Neto's prophetic words that Angola would only gain its peace and true independence through the barrel of the gun, so Mr Dos Santos was too honest and too lenient with Savimbi and his allies when he conceded to their demands for a hasty holding of democratic elections in 1992, and it was a matter of luck.

Savimbi could have finished him by now and perhaps the entire MPLA leadership, as this seemed to have been Savimbi's intentions as his post-elections actions proved.

In the 1970s Neto postulated an important prophetic assertion with regard to the future of his country that "Angola will only earn its permanent peace and true political and economic independence through the barrel of the gun" and this assertion was revealed on February 22 2002, when Jonas Savimbi was killed on the battlefield. His death was unusually marked with celebrations across southern Africa, not because people were crazy and inhuman, but because his death meant a lot and in terms of peace and progress in the entire region and to Angolans in particular.

Though there might be some people who were made to go along with Savimbi's cause for scams, without being aware of the content and intent of Savimbi's deal with the Americans, and so dearly believed in him as an Angolan liberator and are still mourning his death as their statesman and hero and they are free to do so, but they should not lie to justify his cause and blame his death on anybody else, rather than himself.

What was right and positive about Savimbi was his side of the cold war, capitalist liberal democracy, but he was never a liberator of Angola, perhaps he was a freedom fighter during the civil war, but of late he proved himself a non-liberal democrat, after the 1992 UN supervised elections.

I counted Savimbi as a fellow human being, yes he was, but I completely fail to understand as to how a man of his character, a traitor, a true crook and cruel tribal despot, who eliminated all of his opponents within Unita, during the 1980s by live burning, especially the entire Oshiwambo-speaking part of the Unita leadership, can be someone's hero and role model.