Opinion: Borrell cannot twist himself out of this one…

The metaphor of “the garden” and “the jungle” is not my invention. Some truly dislike it because, among others, it has been used by US neo-conservatives, but I am far from this school of political thought. In fact, the concept has been present in academic and political debates for decades, because it refers to a simple question that we face every day: should the international order be based on principles accepted by all, regardless of the strength of its actors, or should it be based on the will of the strongest, which is commonly called “the law of the jungle”? Regrettably, the world in which we live today looks more and more like a “jungle” and less and less like a “garden”, because in many parts of the world, the law of the strongest is eroding agreed international norms” (Josep Borrell – ‘On metaphors and geo-politics’ 18.10.2022).

The highest diplomat of the European Union was disgraceful lately and in his latest piece, which is made to apologize or to explain the sentiment. He is surely not able to backtrack or sound like his sincere about it. The European Exceptionalism is persistent with this man.

The Spanish seasoned politician and diplomat of the European Union, Josep Borrell has cornered himself and for a reason. He is diminishing and distorting his words. While we know very well why he said it and it doesn’t change the fact.

I don’t care if he evented the idea or not. You don’t need to be the first one to make it wrong. You’re just continuing a legacy of colonialism, European hegemony and the belief of a supreme continent. Because Europe is the “Garden of Eden” where people lived in harmony before God kicked them out for sinning. That’s how you’re sounding like and it’s off no good.

He continues: “Some have misinterpreted the metaphor as “colonial Euro-centrism”.  I am sorry if some have felt offended. I believe and have said, for instance to the EU Ambassadors last week, that we are often too Euro-centric and need to be humble and get to know better the rest of the world including the Global South. I have always spoken out against a “Fortress Europe” approach and been strongly engaged in advancing relations with other parts of the world. I also have enough experience to know that neither Europe nor “the West” is perfect and that some countries of “the West” have at times violated international legality” (Borrell, 18.10.2022).

You are the one saying it is and speaking it out. You even started again with the legalities and the modalities of the allegory. The metaphor is clear and for a reason. One is a organized unit and “clean”. The jungle is lawlessness and “dirty”. We can all get the gist of the outrageous attempt of neo-colonialism that was spewed out your mouth recently. It was so easy to see the European Exceptionalism, which you referred too and still does. You even did so in the beginning of this text, which is supposed to be an apology for what you did.

It doesn’t help that you speak out against “Fortress Europe” and says “the West” isn’t perfect. We all know that and see that on the regular too. “The West” and Europe is filled with misgivings and wrongs, which should be called out too. That’s why everything isn’t perfect in Europe either. So, why speak of the fear of “invaders” from the “jungle” in the first place? Isn’t that a sign of what you’re saying the metaphor doesn’t stand for?

Well, you cannot have it both ways. That’s not how this works. You brought up the “heart of darkness” and place of “wild animals”. You even speak of lawlessness, by defining such broad statement about the “global south”. That’s really infuriating, and you are doubling down on it too. How will this fit your mission statement? How is this fitting the standard of operation or how your will coordinate to bring better relations outside of Europe?

As a diplomat and a seasoned politician, you should know better, but clearly that’s too much to ask. He returns and deflects, instead of apologizing for what he did. Showing that somehow, this is who he is and what he believes in. He doesn’t believe in the multilateralism and only in European exceptionalism. That’s proven by now, because he wouldn’t have written an explanation like this, if not… Peace.

African National Congress Youth League (ANCYL): ANCYL Statement on the Solidarity March to the Embassy of Morrocco against the Illegal Occupation in Western Sahara (16.10.2022)

Opinion: Borrell preaches European Exceptionalism…

Oh gosh… this is going to be brutal… that a grown man said this and didn’t think better about his analogy is obvious. The Josep Borrell is the Vice-President in charge of coordinating the external action of the European Union. This is a role his had since December 2019 and his a seasoned Spanish politician.

So, in the mission letter it was even stated this:

Cooperating and working with others is what our Union is all about. We believe in multilateralism because it works. It makes us safer, more prosperous and better able to make the most of the major transitions of our times. This is why Europe will always lead the way when it comes to upholding and, where necessary, updating the rules based global order.” (Mission letter, 01.12.2019).

Certainly, Borrell haven’t taken the multilateralism to heart, which can be defined as: “Multilateralism is often defined in opposition to bilateralism and unilateralism. Strictly speaking, it indicates a form of cooperation between at least three States. Nevertheless, this “quantitative” definition is not sufficient to capture the nature of multilateralism. Indeed, it is not simply a practice or a question of the number of actors involved. It involves adherence to a common political project based on the respect of a shared system of norms and values. In particular, multilateralism is based on founding principles such as consultation, inclusion and solidarity. Its operation is determined by collectively developed rules that ensure sustainable and effective cooperation. In particular, they guarantee all actors the same rights and obligations by applying themselves continuously (and not on a case-by-case basis, depending on the issue handled)” (https://multilateralism100.unog.ch/about, 2020).

So with that in mind, we just have to read the regressive and partly astonishing speech from Borrell, which he should have considered never to say or even speak at a function. This is just pure European Exceptionalism. There is no denying in that and his mission is to believe in multilateralism, which is a stark contrast to that.

Here we go:

Here, Bruges is a good example of the European garden. Yes, Europe is a garden. We have built a garden. Everything works. It is the best combination of political freedom, economic prosperity and social cohesion that the humankind has been able to build – the three things together. And here, Bruges is maybe a good representation of beautiful things, intellectual life, wellbeing. The rest of the world – and you know this very well, Federica – is not exactly a garden. Most of the rest of the world is a jungle, and the jungle could invade the garden. The gardeners should take care of it, but they will not protect the garden by building walls. A nice small garden surrounded by high walls in order to prevent the jungle from coming in is not going to be a solution. Because the jungle has a strong growth capacity, and the wall will never be high enough in order to protect the garden. The gardeners have to go to the jungle. Europeans have to be much more engaged with the rest of the world. Otherwise, the rest of the world will invade us, by different ways and means. Yes, this is my most important message: we have to be much more engaged with the rest of the world. We are privileged people. We built a combination of these three things – political freedom, economic prosperity, social cohesion – and we cannot pretend to survive as an exception. It has to be a way of supporting the others facing the big challenges of our time” – Joseph Borrell (European Diplomatic Academy: Opening remarks by High Representative Josep Borrell at the inauguration of the pilot programme, 13.10.2022).

He clearly didn’t get the memo or in the hour of need had to make an analogy that is just infuriating and insulting. The sort of tenacity and hubris. His a supposed diplomat, who has a mission that is deemed into multilateralism. This speech is the opposite and is pure European Exceptionalism. It is disrespectful for the rest of world. In addition to the mentioned paragraph earlier in the Mission letter, I just feel like adding this as well:

To be a global leader, the Union needs to take decisions in a faster and more efficient way. We must overcome unanimity constraints that hamper our foreign policy. When putting forward proposals, you should seek to use the clauses in the Treaties that allow certain decisions on the common foreign and security policy to be adopted by qualified majority voting” (Mission Letter, 01.12.2019).

He was told to “overcome unanimity constraints that hamper our foreign policy” which this sort of speech isn’t doing. This speech is causing harm and showing an arrogance, which will not be welcomed in the “global south” or outside the continent. The ideals and the analogy is only showing a sentiment, which could resemble the reasoning for colonization in the past. Because, we in Europe are the best and we should be afraid of the ones outside the European continent. That’s deeply disrespectful and could be mentioned as racist.

Because, this is like the biblical “Garden of Eden” and someone coming in to destroy it. That’s not a good look and the European Union diplomat should reconsider his stance. This is not the story he wants to be on his name. Especially, if his supposed to follow the Mission Letter that was written to him in the first place. The European Commission should be shell-shocked by this, because this is doing them no good.

Borrell should consider himself here. It has been causing a stir online and rightfully so. It is distasteful and I thought European Union had come further. This is backtracking and into territories, which the EU don’t want to associated with. Peace.

Opinion: Rahmon challenged Putin….

What are we missing? Something is missing. Something doesn’t work. As it was the main reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union. (Addressing Vladimir Putin – ed.) You are not offended. We have witnessed with you. I witnessed how it fell apart… Then, excuse me, as now, there was no attention to small republics, small nations. Attention. Traditions, customs, everything else were not taken into account. They did not provide assistance, support for development” – Tajik President Emomali Rahmon (13.10.2022)

Yesterday, the Presidenet of Tajikistan, Emomali Rahmon spoke with passion and heart about how Central Asia is treated in concern or as an ally of the Russian Federation. The historical ties and the current alliances, which still remains. Though, there are new expectations and also new ways the nations are diplomatically tied. That is a part that has been forgotten or not cared about from Kremlin.

That’s why Tajik President Rahmon said what he said. It is a unique speech in a diplomatic conference between several of nations. The President of Tajikistan has certainly poured gasoline on the manner of which Putin has acted towards the former USSR republic’s. Therefore, these words should sting, but also get the Russian President to reflect on how the Russian Federation has been seen or acted towards it’s neighbours.

While we know that Putin has a dream of building his empire and be remembered as one of the legends of Moscow. That’s how it seems and how he has used Soviet and old grievances to annex or have war against former USSR republics. That’s why there are lost regions in Georgia, Moldova and in Ukraine, which Putin has used to legitimize Russian interference and annexed too. Which is really the reality here.

His words becomes even more sincere here:

Vladimir Vladimirovich, our request to you is that there be no policy towards the countries of Central Asia, as happened in the Soviet Union. Each country has its own problems, each country has its own questions, each country has its own traditions and customs. We need to find a middle ground, we need to work with each of the republics separately” (Rahmon, 13.10.2022).

Putin should take this to heart. However, we cannot expect anything from him. At this point of time his not the sort of leader that listens or would understand the sentiment even. His more into power-games and outplay leaders. These words might make the Tajik President an enemy of Putin. While he was just coming with honest criticism of Putin. He addressed an issue that needs to be looked into and not forgotten about.

Tajik President is right in saying it and it is about time. However, is it to late for Putin and can he be salvaged in this regard? No, I don’t think so. This is for his successor to fix. Putin will not be interested or do anything about this. That’s my guess, but it would great if the Russian Federation acted upon it. Peace.

Ethiopia: Deputy Prime Minister & Minister of Foreign Affairs Demeke Mekonen letter to Republic of Ireland, Minister of Foreign Affairs & Minister for Defence Simon Coveney (11.10.2022)

Syria: National Coalition of Syrian Revolution and Opposition Forces – Syrian Opposition Coalition – On Need for Immediate End to Infighting in Freed Territories (12.10.2022)

Opinion: Medvedev is getting his wish [and his threats will not get him anywhere]

The fastest way to escalate the conflict in Ukraine to the point of irreversible world war is to supply the loonies in Kiev with long-range MLRS” – Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev (11.10.2022).

Since the Russian-Belorussian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. There been plenty of times the Russians has come with threats, possibly escalations and promised to worsen the conflict. They are the ones that issued the war. Russians are the ones that invaded a sovereign, annexed territories and are the brutal invader in Ukraine. It isn’t like other nations has sent soldiers or become allies of Ukraine. That is what Russia has done with Belarus and wished the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) would do. However, this war in Ukraine has unmasked the lack of protocol, the will or the structure of CSTO.

That’s why Kremlin, State Duma and the likes of Medvedev has to come with such words. As NATO Secretary General had a press conference today. He had to address it and insult not only the leaders of Kyiv. We know the Russian leadership wanted to overthrow and get Kremlin friendly leaders there. That’s why they wanted to invade in the first place. It wasn’t just to “liberate” Donbass regions after annexing Crimea in 2014. No, we know President Putin didn’t respect or believe Ukraine even had proper statehood. So, it was within his right to destroy, deplete and overthrow whatever leadership there was in Kyiv. Therefore, it isn’t shocking that Putin’s ally calling Zelensky and his associates “loonies” because they cannot phantom or stomach someone who has spine or can stand up to Kremlin.

It is just really interesting that the same time Medvedev is saying this about MLRS, the NATO Secretary General is speaking of the supply of NASAMS, which is a MLRS system. It means the NATO isn’t afraid of the “escalation” because they have weighed the outcome and the progression of the war. However, Russia has massacred, hit civilian targets and done serious war-crimes. That’s why Russians should speak of escalations. They have already breached the Geneva Convention on a regular basis since February 2022.

Just over the last days we have had two new announcements from NATO Allies – from Germany and United States – to provide more advanced air defence systems. The Germans announced it yesterday, and we welcome of course that. And United States has announced further delivery and we know also that they have announced that they’re also ready to provide and deliver NASAMS, which are actually one of the many advanced systems that Ukraine has received over the last months. And again, we need more and we need also more ammunition to these systems and I welcome that Allies are doing that. These air defence systems are making a difference because many of the incoming missiles were actually shot down by the Ukrainian air defence systems provided by NATO Allies. But of course, as long as not all of them are shot down, of course there is a need for more. And therefore we are going to address at the meeting this week, tomorrow, with Defence Minister Reznikov how, what type, and how can we ensure not only the delivery of the systems as soon as possible, but also training, spare parts and ammunition to their air defence capabilities” – NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg (11.10.2022).

It is just really striking that Medvedev is saying this and NATO is confirming that they are coming with these weapons. The MLRS or the NASAMS is coming to Ukraine. The Ukrainian Armed Forces are getting these long range missiles systems to defend itself. After seeing how the Russians are bombing across the Ukraine. That can help the defence and stop further missiles or drones from damaging vital infrastructure, electric lines or whatnot. Which has been the targets of Russian Army of late. Therefore, Medvedev would just prefer a total blackout and destruction of Ukrainian society. That we know was the will of his President. He is just a noble servant that way.

Europe and NATO is certainly not afraid or reluctant to help Ukraine any longer. They are actually prepared to offer proper weaponry and the ones that is fitting for the needs. The European and NATO allies are supporting Kyiv with heavy weaponry. That is long time coming and needed too. This is why Medvedev is crying wolf and havoc. We could see it coming a mile away. The battles on the ground isn’t going in Kremlin’s or Duma’s way. Neither can Putin be happy either. He must here the results and the losses. It must hurt the pride of Russia.

However, Russia invaded a sovereign and they deserve to lose their pride. They have violated, destroyed and massacred civilians to prove a point. That’s why European nations and NATO has continue to support Ukraine. The war isn’t over and Russia is still invading Ukraine. Russians are still imposing itself in Ukraine. As long as that is happening the Republic of Ukraine needs aide and military assistance. It has to continue as long as it takes. Secondly, it is all up to Russia to cease operations and warfare in Ukraine. They can just retreat tomorrow, but we know they will not do so. Peace.

Opinion: Lukashenko is Putin’s little minion

MINSK, 10 October (BelTA) – Belarus and Russia agreed to deploy a joint regional group of forces, Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko said at a meeting on security matters, BelTA has learned. Aleksandr Lukashenko recalled that he had a one-on-one meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin after the informal CIS summit in St. Petersburg. “Given the worsening of the situation on the western borders of the Union State, we agreed to deploy a regional group of forces of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus. This complies with our documents. It says that if the threat level reaches the level as it is now, we begin to use the Union State group of forces. The basis (I have always said this) of this group is the army, the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus. I must inform you that the formation of this group has begun. It’s been going on for, I think, two days. I gave an order to start forming this group,” the Belarusian leader said. Aleksandr Lukashenko also noted that Russia cannot deal with another conflict now. “Last thing they need is another conflict. You know they have enough problems. Therefore, we should not expect a large number of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. But it will be more than one thousand people,” he said” (BelTA – ‘Lukashenko, Putin agree on deployment of joint regional group of forces’ 10.10.2022).

The Russian-Belorussian invasion of Ukraine started this year in February 2022. This was coordinated efforts and the Russian Armed Forces was stationed in Belarus before invading Ukraine. The Moscow-Minsk alliance has grown strong and Aleksandr Lukashenko needs Vladimir Putin. His is totally a crony and an ally. There is no self-reliance and the Belarus counterpart could just have been annexed by now. Since, Lukashenko likes to be humiliated and be servant of Putin.

The latest isn’t really that much of an escalation. When the Belarus has already been used to attack and be territories friendly for Russian Armed Forces. This was deliberate acts in the early start of the invasion in February, just to ensure the Russian invading forces was encircling most of the Ukrainian borders. Therefore, it is only more practical and even more established.

We know that Lukashenko has already been aiding and abetting the war. From now on it can easily be seen as a part of the war. Where it is waging war together with it’s Russian ally. This means the Russian-Belorussian invasion is very fitting, which I coined early in February. Well, the Belarus army at that time didn’t practically send forces or violate Ukrainian territories, but the same armies did train and help Russian Armed Forces to enter Ukraine from it’s territories. That’s being part of the war-effort and if Minsk didn’t allow it too happen. The Russian Army couldn’t have used these entry points to being with.

This is an addition for the Russian Armed Forces to get the Belarus Army on it’s side. Especially, since the warfare is going badly, the loss of territories and momentum. The Ukrainian forces are regaining territories, which are a big blow to Kremlin and Putin. He has annexed territories, which is places where his losing land on the regular. The maps of the annexed regions must be changing everyday and the struggle to keep up must be mind-boggling. So, to get a helping hand from the servant of Minsk must be a golden opportunity.

Lukashenko is only as powerful as his ally. He only has power and influence, because the Kremlin and Moscow has saved his office over the years. If it wasn’t for military support and influential expertise from Kremlin. Lukashenko wouldn’t still be in office or be a President for Life. He would just a lost one… that was proven in the last election and he was only saved by Putin.

So, because of the saving grace. His in the mercy of Putin. Putin knows this and can play Lukashenko all he wants. Since, he knows that Lukashenko needs Russia more than Russia needs Belarus. This a favour for a favour and in an hour of need. The Belorussian army is just entering in a moment of dire desperation. The Russian Armed Forces clearly needs a boost. What is more boosting than having a clear cut alliance on the front and getting Minsk to be its servant. In that way, your getting fresh trained recruits and able bodies for the war. Before, the Russians themselves are able to send the “mass-mobilized” forces from the rural areas of the Federation to the front in Ukraine.

Lukashenko knows this will backfire, but part of him knows he has no choice. He cannot just abide or aide the war. He got to be involved to still be an ally to Putin. That’s why his doing it and by doing so. His partaking in an unjust war just to save his own office. His possibly sending his own citizens to die in a war that wasn’t theirs to begin with. Peace.

A look into Mzee’s 60th Independence Speech Part II [a story about the East African Federation]

It has, therefore, been long, ever since the NRM and its pre-cursors, started supporting the struggle for the realization of the dream of the East African Federation. If we had achieved that by 1963 as the elders had intended, this part of the World would be very far. Some of the political elite, let down Africa in 1963 by frustrating the effort. If the Federation had been launched in 1963, you can be sure that Idi Amin would never have taken power in Uganda, there would have been no genocide in Rwanda or the killings in Burundi, Congo would have stabilized long ago, the problems of South Sudan, would have been solved much earlier and the problem of Somalia may not have turned out the way it did. Even today, the sort of problems we are facing, would be easily solved” – President Yoweri Tibuhurwa Kaguta Museveni (09.10.2022).

Today on the 9th October 2022, yet again President Museveni held his Independence Day Speech, which he has year after year. These speeches are long and this year was no different. He held a two hour long speech at Kololo Grounds and certainly there was plenty of points or things to look into. However, in this here piece. I am only looking into the stories of the East African Federation.

President Museveni comes with strong claims and reasoning. He blames the ones in 1963 for not pushing through with the East African Federation. Nevertheless, the nations haven’t since then been able to agree or find the stipulations fitting for a federation. Neither has the nations been able to agree on an East African constitution. It has been plenty of stumbling blocks and this is why we are seeing an East African Community (EAC) in 2022.

Just read these insights here!

It was mainly Uganda’s objection to the surrender of sovereignty, the desire to preserve its fragile internal unity, and the fear of Kenyan control over regional institutions which led to the failure of East African federation. In fact, President Obote had made a statement that the Nairobi declaration did not commit Uganda to federation and that the questions of relationships and powers were still in the ‘exploratory stage’. For the Tanganyikans and Kenyans, regional unity involved ‘the concept of a tightly constructed federation’” (…) “By the end of 1963 the failure of the federation was clear. The last session of the Working Party was held in Kampala in May 1964, but the three Presidents found that the political union they had advocated so wholeheartedly was no longer feasible. It can be argued that national interests developed guickly in East Africa during 1963, as President Nyerere had prophesied:

We shall be increasing the number of human beings who have a personal interest in disunity – and because they are human beings most of them will be more conscious of the advantages of the present situation and the difficulties of change than of the long-term benefits which could come” (John A. Mgaya – ‘REGIONAL INTEGRATION: THE CASE OF THE EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY’ P: 14-15, August 1986).

Though the official start of the East African Community’s project lay at the beginning of the new millennium, the roots of the drive for East African unity actually extend much farther back. It began at the signing of the treaty of East African Cooperation in 1967, following the end of the British colonial period. While the treaty was abandoned a mere decade later due to faltering political will and disparate levels of development between the three nations, the idea would remain a powerful one. In fact, it was powerful enough for regional governments to revisit the possibility after the end of the Cold War” (Borgen Magazine – ‘The East African Community’s First Constitution’ 28.03.2020).

The East African Heads of State signed the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community in Arusha, on 30 November 1999. Prior to re-launching the East African Community in 1999, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda had enjoyed a long history of cooperation under successive regional integration arrangements. These included the Customs Union between Kenya and Uganda in 1917, which the Tanganyika later joined in 1927; the East African High Commission (1948- 1961); the East African Common Services Organisation (1961-1967); the East African Community (1967-1977), and the East African Co-operation (1993-1999)” (UNESCO – ‘RELATIONS WITH THE EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY (EAC) AND DRAFT COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN UNESCO AND THAT ORGANIZATION’ 2006).

After reading these it is easy to see why it didn’t happen and Nyerere was prophetic about it. His words has been proven and righteous. Museveni who has had the time and could have pushed further. His never done so or tried that much. Since, he knows he would give way on the sovereignty and the rights of Uganda. We know that Museveni wouldn’t allow or accept being controlled by Nairobi or Dodoma for that matter. This is why Obote was reluctant and wasn’t willing in 1963.

It is interesting that later in the speech today that Museveni further said this about the subject:

In the 1962 Independence elections, no Party could win by absolute majority because they had fragmented the electorate into sectarian groups that could never attract broad support. Guided by our principle of Pan-Africanism, when we won power, we worked with Mzee Hassan Mwinyi, Mzee Benjamin Mkapa, Mzee Daniel Arap Moi, supported by Mwalimu Julius Nyerere who was still alive, to revive the EAC, which was re-inaugurated on the 30th of November, 1999.Guided by the same principles, we stood with the African brothers in South Africa, Namibia, South Sudan, Rwanda, Burundi, Somalia, etc. It is this principle, that educates us not to aim at building a Latin America in Africa but build a United States of Africa in Africa –to ensure the prosperity of our people and the strategic security of Africa” (Museveni, 09.10.2022).

Here Mgaya reasons differently than Museveni on the matter, especially the reasons around 1962, which he says this: “While people like Tom Mboya supported Nyerere, in Uganda the Kabaka’s government and Obote’s Democratic Party stated that Uganda was not ready for federation. Therefore, soon after Tanganyika’s independence in December 1961 Nyerere stated that federation would now have to wait until all three countries were sovereign” (John A. Mgaya – ‘REGIONAL INTEGRATION: THE CASE OF THE EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY’ P: 13, August 1986).

Here we see there is nothing about sectarianism or such. It was about the independence and becoming sovereign republic’s themselves. That is all natural that you wouldn’t the same minute your getting independence, become a part of another entity. The new nations would need time to assess and consider their foreign diplomatic ties and trading partners. That is just natural and this is the reason for the downfall of the East African Federation in 1963. As there was internal fears and speculations into the balances of power and losses of sovereignty to others. Parts, which Museveni doesn’t dwell upon. He only speculates of the salvation from the worst damages and suffering, which has happen since. However, he hasn’t spoken about his involvement in these and how he sponsored the violence and military operations in several of the neighbouring countries over the years. That’s why it’s epic that he doesn’t look into his interference there for personal gains.

Last part about 1999 has also been stated in the little documentation I found. That Museveni mentions in the second paragraph of EAC or East African Federation part of his speech. He takes pride in the moment of the 1999. Nevertheless, since then and the ills he mentioned. The EAC should have ensured that his nation didn’t interfere in the Democratic Republic Congo (DRC) or in South Sudan for that matter. Museveni has done this and been vital in it. Therefore, his own military activity across the borders has caused the pain and sufferings, which the EAC couldn’t deal with or had any say in. That’s why it’s really hypocritical of him. He wouldn’t have accepted their interference and totally blocking of it. We just know he wouldn’t have followed it anyway.

That’s why it’s interesting that he says this. We know the war to topple Mobutu and Laurent Kabila in the Democratic Republic of Congo. We know how Uganda supported the Rwandan Patriotic Front in the 1990s. There has been speculations for year in the Museveni involvement in the late death of Dr. Joseph Garang. We can also mention the involvement and support of Nkurunziza in Burundi. Therefore, he has interfered and ensured allies in the neighbour nation and done so deliberately. So, when he speaks of the ills of the people and the never ending troubles that needs to be solved. He has partook in the action and should take some blame in it. Since he has invested, used his armies and gained personal power by doing so. I doubt the East African Community or Federation could have stopped him. Within the time frame and the context, the nations involved wasn’t even signed up and would have been out of EAC/EAF. Peace.

Ethiopia: Uhuru Kenyatta letter to the African Union on his participation at the AU-Convened Peace Talks on Ethiopia (07.10.2022)